 |
| Marketing BS or Earth-saver? |
What's that? No, this isn't a house from the early 80s with godawful tube lights in the kitchen and lacking ceiling pre-wires - this is a two-to-three year old building redone with all CFLs.
Didn't we learn 20 years ago that FLUORESCENT lights are not the most "homey"?! They're cold, they have to "warm up", they're hazardous when they break, they hummed, they felt like a work building, and the fixtures were fugly as sin.
Fast forward to today, where "CFL" stands for "compact" - so we can erase one of my beefs above (the fixtures aren't giant tube mostrosities because of the "C"). Maybe two, some of them don't seem to hum. Bonus, there are some cool color options out there, I grant you that. Otherwise, I don't get it.
I'm all for saving the planet, and I understand that conservation techniques may be more complicated. I don't get how adding hazardous materials and more than quadrupling the price for a bulb that may last longer (I say may as I've had to replace three of the damn things in less than a year, so the savings are still WAY offset by expense) is worth saving some electricity generation.
Anyway, my two cents - what's your experience with CFL's? Are you hoarding regular bulbs, holding out for better CFL technology, going LED..?
