One of the new lamps, the Pulsar LED Lamp “Bob” have been awarded and selected for the “Design and Design” Award.

I’ve read that the whining some CFLs make is dependent on the quality of the bulb, and for some it’s even a sign that they’ve lived their lifespan and need to be recycled.

On other comments:

Not all CFLs are spirals. Energy Star offers CFLs that look almost exactly like conventional bulbs (excluding the ballast on the bottom).

As far as the mercury goes, I think that educational programs that will foster the psychology where recycling light bulbs is a given will eliminate the dangers from mercury. There is also the possibility (unless excluded for reasons I don’t know) that development of CFL technology will evolve past the use of mercury and other exotic materials. LEDs might also be a possibility, but for for now what we’ve got is CFLs for a greener alternative.

If millions of people get these bulbs, then millions of people will throw them away, most not even realizing the dangerous elements inside the bulbs. How much mercury would leech into the water table then?

And what is the energy cost of recycling the mercury from the bulbs, as the bulbs cannot be safely disposed of? Is any energy actually saved in the life cycle of the bulbs over CFLs?

Spreading CFLs is creating a new, very large market for mercury. This is a terrible direction to go after the great reductions in commercial mercury use in the 1990s. Mercury waste reduced almost ten-fold from 1991-1994.

Considering all these factors, I believe incandescents, though less energy efficient at the house, are far better for the environment than CFLs over the life cycle of the bulbs. Heck, at least I don’t have to worry about one of my kids having mental problems from a broken incandescent.

I think if we all exercise our patience muscles a little, we will see the superior LED technology take over at an affordable price. They use far fewer amounts of exotic materials than CFLs or incandescents, they use far less electricity, last as long or longer than CFLs, and are practically indestructable. Please consider some of these factors before promoting or switching to CFLs.

Sincerely,
Royal

My appartment has all CFL ( and one Halogen modern chandelier that my wife loved – so no choice there :D)
From those from IKea to GU10 type lamps( I don’t know if thats the same refence inUS) also CFL (http://www.ebulbshop.com/acatalog/GU10.html )

The Uggliest ones on our side of the Atlantic are the ones with U shaped CFL :D like these VARIO CFL Lamps from OSRAM ( SIemens unit) http://catalog.myosram.com/zb2b/catalog/categorieInPath.do?key=0/FD262EC233A1644CA72E7EEFFB85FEA3/51FB64535317E242A50DFFDE84F676F6/82FCBA4051254B49B667087957C7A3D6/1E001A8930E86845B7839B894E68A2F2/CC8A82528253A546AC6D4C3BDF0F7544

Thanks
Tchau
Pedro

There are dimmable CFLs. They are more expensive, but you can also get a modular dimmable CFL (http://www.goodmart.com/products/915293.htm) that lets you replace the lamp when it burns out but keep the more expensive dimming ballast.

39 dimmable CFLs are found in a search on energystar.gov:
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=cfls.advanced_cfl_search_submit

I like Osram Sylvania’s website pages that explain some basics of lighting: http://www.sylvania.com/LearnLighting/LightAndColor/UnderstandingLight/

and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s site has this to tell you about full spectrum lighting: http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/NLPIP/lightingAnswers/fullSpectrum/abstract.asp

In my experience, fluorescent lighting can be very good or it can really be awful, and it depends greatly on the visual environment in which these lamps are used. The best fluorescents that I have seen have been the ones with high CRI ratings. At the same time I recognize that the characteristics of lighting we choose depends greatly on the subjective response we want to feel in a given location, and that may not necessarily require a high CRI rating.