CFL bulbs and energy usage.
January 22, 2010 1:48 PM Subscribe
Has the relatively widespread uptake of CFL bulbs actually had any significant effect upon global energy useage?
harlequin, could the slowing of the global economy account for that slowing in electricity demand? I would think it would be hard to quantify what was reduced demand due to CFLs and what was due to less demand overall.
posted by cecic at 2:32 PM on January 22, 2010
posted by cecic at 2:32 PM on January 22, 2010
It's hardly scientific, but this page (facts tab) says LED bulbs could reduce world-wide energy consumption by 10%. If so, that means CFL bulbs, which are almost half as efficient, could cut energy consumption by 5%, which might not actually be noticeable.
posted by blue_beetle at 2:54 PM on January 22, 2010
posted by blue_beetle at 2:54 PM on January 22, 2010
harlequin, could the slowing of the global economy account for that slowing in electricity demand?
No. I'd put economic factors under "than would otherwise be expected", and the practise of using energy-efficiency incentives to offset building more powerplants has been going on for longer than the latest economic downturn.
posted by -harlequin- at 3:21 PM on January 22, 2010
No. I'd put economic factors under "than would otherwise be expected", and the practise of using energy-efficiency incentives to offset building more powerplants has been going on for longer than the latest economic downturn.
posted by -harlequin- at 3:21 PM on January 22, 2010
relatively widespread uptake of CFL bulbs
Relatively, it isn't widespread at all. A recent survey showed that 74% of US households had changed a bulb to CFL in the last year. Many say they will switch ... but CFLs remain second behind incandescent bulbs in sales. To some extent this is expected, as they need replacement less often. But it underscores that many users may have only changed certain bulbs. For myself, I have a rough rule of thumb regarding how long a light is typically on and how accessible it is. On the flipside, I have kept reading and work lighting incandescent for now (although I am planning to switch some of these to daylight/white light bulbs). I consider myself an aggressive adopter compared to what I have seen in other homes.
I also admit to some, shall we say, lumen arbitrage. In lights where I used to have a 60W bulb, rather than replace it with a 15W CFL I will often put in an 18W CFL (75W lumen equivalent). We do have a 19th century house with limited natural lighting, though.
Also, the effect is only in one limited part of the energy consumption pie. Lighting is just 12% of residential energy usage in the US (25% of commercial, though). Some estimate its percentage even lower, leading to smaller declines (in the rate of increase of usage). Another factor is the loss of incandescent heat, which in northern climate winters will need to be replaced with (somewhat more efficient) HVAC heating usage, although it will also mean declines in HVAC cooling where applicable.
Basically, it's measurable in the sense that every CFL bulb is actually using less energy -- but overall energy usage may not be the best place to look for its effects.
posted by dhartung at 11:25 PM on January 22, 2010
Relatively, it isn't widespread at all. A recent survey showed that 74% of US households had changed a bulb to CFL in the last year. Many say they will switch ... but CFLs remain second behind incandescent bulbs in sales. To some extent this is expected, as they need replacement less often. But it underscores that many users may have only changed certain bulbs. For myself, I have a rough rule of thumb regarding how long a light is typically on and how accessible it is. On the flipside, I have kept reading and work lighting incandescent for now (although I am planning to switch some of these to daylight/white light bulbs). I consider myself an aggressive adopter compared to what I have seen in other homes.
I also admit to some, shall we say, lumen arbitrage. In lights where I used to have a 60W bulb, rather than replace it with a 15W CFL I will often put in an 18W CFL (75W lumen equivalent). We do have a 19th century house with limited natural lighting, though.
Also, the effect is only in one limited part of the energy consumption pie. Lighting is just 12% of residential energy usage in the US (25% of commercial, though). Some estimate its percentage even lower, leading to smaller declines (in the rate of increase of usage). Another factor is the loss of incandescent heat, which in northern climate winters will need to be replaced with (somewhat more efficient) HVAC heating usage, although it will also mean declines in HVAC cooling where applicable.
Basically, it's measurable in the sense that every CFL bulb is actually using less energy -- but overall energy usage may not be the best place to look for its effects.
posted by dhartung at 11:25 PM on January 22, 2010
Response by poster: Thanks for the answers everyone. It seems to be as I suspected, CFLs are having an effect but it is large confused with many other variables.
posted by SueDenim at 5:35 PM on January 23, 2010
posted by SueDenim at 5:35 PM on January 23, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
*I haven't looked for any global figures, or CFL-specific figures, but judging from what is happening at the local level, I assume that CFL's are globally significant.
posted by -harlequin- at 2:28 PM on January 22, 2010