1 Compact Fluorescent Light Bulb = 1 Nuclear Power Plant

I'm a big fan of compact fluorescent light bulbs; they use a fifth of the energy of an incandescent bulb yet produce the same amount of light. The resulting reduction in your electric bill can be substantial, particularly if you live in a state like California where electricity is relatively expensive.

I've seen several articles recently that highlight how significant the energy savings could be if every home in America switched to compact fluorescent bulbs.

A CFL in every Home = 1 Nuclear Power Plant

There are an estimated 110M households in the US, so if you replaced one 60W incandescent with a similarly lumen-rated 13W CFL (I'd estimate a distribution cost of $100M-200M), you'd save just over $4.1B in electrical bills over the lifetime of the bulbs ($0.10/kWh over 8000 hours). At 5 hours/evening of usage (~4.4yr), we're looking at almost a billion bucks a year. That's not a bad ROI.

A global switch to efficient lighting systems would trim the world's electricity bill by one-tenth:

The carbon dioxide emissions saved by such a switch would, dwarf cuts so far achieved by adopting wind and solar power.

"Lighting is a major source of electricity consumption," said Paul Waide, a senior policy analyst with the IEA and one of the report's authors.

"Nineteen percent of global electricity generation is taken for lighting - that's more than is produced by hydro or nuclear stations, and about the same that's produced from natural gas," he told the BBC News website.

The carbon dioxide produced by generating all of this electricity amounts to 70% of global emissions from passenger vehicles, and is three times more than emissions from aviation, the IEA says.

Replacing all the incandescent bulbs in your house with fluorescents might equate to the carbon dioxide savings in driving a hybrid automobile:

We can estimate the annual greenhouse gas savings from a Prius vs a Toyota Matrix, FWD, automatic. The Prius gets an EPA-rated 55 mpg, vs 31 mpg for the Matrix. Assuming 12,000 miles annually, it will save 169 gallons of gasoline per year. Since each gallon produces 11.1 kg of CO2-equivalent GHG emissions, the Prius saves 1,875 kg of CO2-equivalent annually.

I would guess each bulb can save you about 85W (100W-15W), so 15 will save you 1275W. If the lights are on 2400 h/yr (6.6h/day), they will save 3,060 kWh. Using a national average of 1.35 pounds of CO2 per kWh, this will save 4131 lb or 1,875 kg of CO2. So it doesn't seem like an unreasonable statement that the two are comparable.

CFLs aren't cheap, though. I've found the best inexpensive sources for CFL bulbs of various types are Costco and IKEA.

For example, we leave the kitchen lights on almost continuously when we're at home; that's five 60 watt bulbs. Replacing those with 14 watt equivalent compact flourescent bulbs equates to a 230 watt savings. That alone is enough to feel the difference on our monthly electric bill!

posted on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 4:11 PM by jatwood

Comments

# re: 1 Compact Fluorescent Light Bulb = 1 Nuclear Power Plant

Those are a ton of great facts that are convincing enough to make me buy CFL's. Actually, A buddy of mine, who is a teacher, came across this company that works with schools to do environmentally friendly fund raisers. Not only do the schools make extra money but they help the environment and make people more aware of global warming as well. They also offer lesson plans for teachers who are interested in teaching their students about the environment as well as lesson plans for An Inconvenient Truth with Vice President Al Gore. Their main product is compact fluorescent light bulbs which save a ton of energy and money compared with incandescent bulbs. They are called One Plant Fund raising and their website is www.oneplanetfundraising.c
om. Definitely worth checking out!
Saturday, February 24, 2007 5:12 PM by Lindsey

# re: 1 Compact Fluorescent Light Bulb = 1 Nuclear Power Plant

I've read that the flicker of Fluorescent Light Bulbs causes harm to human beings. While the flicker of Fluorescent Light Bulbs is not seen with the naked eye it is there and harms humans.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007 4:26 PM by Sovereign John

# re: 1 Compact Fluorescent Light Bulb = 1 Nuclear Power Plant

It's not as simple as saying (an energy saving bulb uses 14 watts per hour, a normal 100ww uses 100 watts per hour therefore I will save 86 watts of energy per pulb per hour).Whats needed is a controlled household study, i.e one identical house with and one house without energy saving bulbs, same living profile.The TOTAL energy usage of both houses then needs to be compared after an appropriate period and season.(i.e wintertime when household energy usage is highest).I would not be surprised to see much smaller savings than expected. The energy saving fluorescent bulbs take more energy to turn on, and do not work well in cold areas (porch,sheds attic...).They are not suitable for numerous small periods of use.Also the so called waisted energy from normal bulbs is 'HEAT' and can be used efficiently by having proper insulation levels installed.The heating system has less to doo (and uses less energy) when normal light bulbs are in use in a well insulated house.There is no real advantage to using energy saving bulbs in summer either (lights are used far less in summer!).
Friday, June 01, 2007 12:44 AM by Joe