Fixit: More details about light bulb comparisons

December 28, 2009 at 10:47PM

A recent column compared the cost of the constant operation of a compact fluorescent light (CFL) to a traditional incandescent light. Several readers took issue with the answer, asking:

"Why compare a 15-watt CFL bulb to a 60-watt traditional bulb? That's not an apples-to-apples comparison; no wonder the CFL came out ahead."

Or:

"Why give such a long life to CFLs in the formula? They don't last that long. So that makes the formula you used wrong."

And:

"CFLS can't be used outdoors. So why even compare them to regular lights?"

Here are the answers to those questions:

• Actually, the fairest comparison is between a 60-watt incandescent light bulb and a 15-watt CFL. That's because a 15-watt CFL produces about the same amount of light as a 60-watt incandescent light. The issue is about light provided, not watts -- specifically, how much it will cost to light an area all day, every day. A CFL will do it for less because it produces light so much more efficiently. A lumen is the measure of light produced by a lamp. A standard 60-watt incandescent lamp produces 860 lumens, or about 14 lumens per watt of energy. A 15-watt CFL produces about the same amount of light but at a much greater efficiency, 60 to 70 lumens per watt.

• CFLs do last a long time, longer than incandescent light bulbs. But quality varies widely from manufacturer to manufacturer. Quality bulbs often cost more than the lower-quality ones sold at many stores. For the best bulb performance, look for the Energy Star label or a manufacturer's guarantee. Remember to keep your receipts, and don't be afraid to return a bulb if it fails prematurely.

• Not every CFL will work in every application. Cold-weather operation is difficult for CFLs, although some CFLs are now rated for outdoor use. You'll have to look for them. But the question that prompted the original comparison concerned indoor lighting, where cold typically is not a concern.

CFLs not the last word In 2007, when federal legislation mandated efficiency standards for light bulbs, it looked like that would be the end of incandescent bulbs. The notoriously inefficient incandescent bulbs didn't meet the standards; the CFL did. That sparked the worry that we'd all be forced to buy and use CFLs, and that the government was banning incandescent light bulbs.

Not so fast. What actually happened is that the new standards spurred manufacturers to improve incandescent bulbs to produce more light and less heat and meet the standards.

Meanwhile, the CFL is far from perfect and is but a steppingstone to the future. It, along with the incandescent light bulb, will be knocked off store shelves by lighting innovations coming soon. Stay tuned.

Send your questions to Fixit in care of the Star Tribune, 425 Portland Av. S., Minneapolis, MN 55488, or call 612-673-7032, or e-mail fixit@startribune.com. Past columns are available at www. startribune.com/fixit. Sorry, Fixit cannot supply individual replies. Fixit appears every day except Friday.

about the writer

about the writer

KAREN YOUSO, Star Tribune

More from Minnesota Star Tribune

See More
card image
J. SCOTT APPLEWHITE, ASSOCIATED PRESS/The Minnesota Star Tribune

The "winners" have all been Turkeys, no matter the honor's name.

In this photo taken Monday, March 6, 2017, in San Francisco, released confidential files by The University of California of a sexual misconduct case, like this one against UC Santa Cruz Latin Studies professor Hector Perla is shown. Perla was accused of raping a student during a wine-tasting outing in June 2015. Some of the files are so heavily redacted that on many pages no words are visible. Perla is one of 113 UC employees found to have violated the system's sexual misconduct policies in rece