The Battle of the Bulb

In 2007, George W. Bush signed a bill into law that is now under heavy discussion in the US. In a world recovering from a severe economic crisis, with North-Africa shivering under its shackles & East-Asia trying to shackle its shivers, the US is finally tackling ... lighting bulbs.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 states that all general-purpose light bulbs (the standard Edison ICLs) that produce between 310 and 2600 lumens (measure of luminosity) of light be made 30% more energy efficient by 2012-2014. The 100-watt bulbs will have to be dealt with by January 2012, followed by the 75-watt in 2013 and the 60- and 40-watt bulbs by 2014. Senators & common people alike are discussing the change, questioning the need to do so, the safety of the replacing bulbs and the right of the congress to force the American People.

We decided to take a closer look at the debate, and then shed our own (Compact Fluorescent) light on the situation.

The bill doesn’t actually outlaw the Incandescent Lamps (ICLs) or force the people to use Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFLs), but sets new – higher – standards for the amount of light (lumen) emitted per watt of power used. Considering that ICLs haven’t changed much since their invention by Thomas Edison, over 100 years ago, this is hardly shocking.

American Senators and common people still object to the bill, however, based on several grounds, the main one being the potential health risks that are associated with the mercury-content of CFLs.  Each bulb contains four milligrams of mercury, compared to none in the old ICLs. The toxic mercury is released when the lamp is broken, and can be absorbed or inhaled, potentially causing brain damage. Care is therefore necessary when breaking a CFL and disposal in landfills is to be avoided. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued detailed instructions on how to deal with a broken CFL.

This danger is why Amy Ridenour, president of the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative group, has been hoarding ICLs in her basement. Her son, Jonathan, is autistic and quite prone to knocking over lamps & breaking light bulbs. She has already gathered over a 100 old-style bulbs, and is hoping to have a few hundreds by the time the bill goes into effect. (source: NY Times)

Another objection is the cost. CFLs are three to ten times more expensive than the standard ICLs.

Other objections – such as those raised by Representative “Smokey Joe” Barton, well-known for his doubts about climate change - are focussed on the ‘socialist’ nature of the bill, which has the Congress dictating what light bulbs hardworking Americans are allowed to use. “From the health insurance you’re allowed to have, to the car you can drive, to the light bulbs you can buy, Washington is making too many decisions that are better left to you and your family,” Mr. Barton said when he introduced his bill in January (Source: USA Today). Senator Rand Paul agreed, and added that he also blamed the government for the poorly working toilets in his house because of the regulations on water usage (Source: NY Times). The lighter of the Statue of Liberty, Howard M. Brandston – an expert, if there are any – agreed, saying that “the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 ignores the fundamentals of good lighting practice and intrudes on our ability to choose how we live”. (Source : the official website of Senator Enzi))

The Osram Sylvania survey has shown that about 13% of Americans would stock up on ICLs and would continue using them after the phase-out. Most of these will do so because of health considerations and financial reasons.

On the other side of the debate we have those official instances with some knowledge of the issues at hand, such as the US Energy Department, and the majority of the American people.

CFLs do contain mercury, unlike ICLs. It should, however, be noted that through continued research, the mercury content has been dropping gradually over the last couple of years (e.g. dropping more than 20% between 20017 and 2008). Lastly, one should consider exactly how often one breaks a light bulb while changing it (and divide that number by ten, considering the longer lifetime).
Still, CFLs contain mercury and ICLs don’t, so a switch might indeed lead to a slightly higher mercury concentration in populated areas and indoor. This (potential) increase, however, is dwarfed when considering the emissions avoided due to their reduced demand (75%) for electricity. Considering that most of the electricity in the US is still produced by coal-fired power plants, a complete replacement of ICLs by CFLs will actually lead to a total 70% decrease of mercury input into the atmosphere.  (source: Energy Star)

Concerning the (much) higher costs of the CFLs, one should keep in mind their longevity  & much higher efficiency.  A traditional ICL bulb will only use 10% of the consumed energy to produce light, burning off the rest as heat.  Kathleen Hogan, deputy assistant secretary for energy efficiency at the Energy Department, told a Senate committee that consumers could save up to US $ 6 billion in 2015 by meeting the new lighting standards (Source : Gainesville). The Natural Resources Defense Council says that the bill would “save homeowners $100 to $200 a year in energy costs and cut power-plant pollution by 100 million tons, the equivalent of taking 17 million cars off the road.”(Source: USA Today) )

The discussion is continued on the Colbert Report.

The Colbert Report

For an "Easy English" explanation on the differences between CFLs & ICLs, the following video is quite nice too.



                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

Contrary to the US, India will not completely ban the use of ICLs. Under the Bachat Lamp Yojana programme, they are, however, planning to replace 400 million ICLs (of 60 and 100W) with CFLs by 2012, decreasing carbon emissions by 55 million tonnes per year. They are doing this by using CDM funding to lower the price from INRs 80-100 to INRs 15 (Source : Greenpeace). On top of that, the state of Tamil Nadu has banned ICL use in all governmental and public bodies and those running on government aid. (Source : NDTV)

Green Village Ventures uses the same CDM funding as the Bachat Lamp Yojana, replacing ICLs by CFLs in isolated villages. The energy efficiency & longevity of the lamps matters even more in the rural areas of the Indian subcontinent, where people need every rupee they have to get by and where the bright, white light of the CFLs is greatly appreciated by artisans and students...

                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

In China, the whole ICL – CFL debate has taken a comic turn, with adds showing the difference between the lazy, fat ICLs versus the slim and efficient CFLs.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

And finally, it might be good to think about the sad downfall of the Hasbro Easy Bake Ovens. These turned the inefficiency of the old ICLs to an advantage, using the “waste heat” into a useful cooking tool – giving you some idea of the bulb’s lack of effiency. Not to worry, however, as Hasbro has already announced a new energy-efficient Easy Bake Ultimate Oven, to be launched this fall...

The Old Easy Bake (Photo credit: reedwade via Flickr)

The New Easy Bake Ultimate