I have purchased a bulb of each kind and am conducting an experiment with each of the three. As part of the experiment, I need to account for:
- Quality of light
- Cost of bulb
- Heat of bulb
- Cost of electricity
- Cost of replacement
I just finished my evaluation of the CFL and I must admit, it stands the test of the test.
I find the light to be nearly equal to the light given off by the incandescent. Which to me, in certain conditions, is a deal breaker. Further, the heat given off by the CFL is manageable. While I am unable to unscrew a traditional light bulb while burning, I was able to unscrew a CFL while burning.
So, the financials:
|Bulb||Cost per Bulb||Cost per KWH||Cost per hour||Lifespan||50,000 Hour Cost|
Not even close. Over the course of 50,000 hours the savings is about 400% over the incandescent bulb., And if you demonstrate the savings in terms of 10,000 hours:
|Bulb||Cost per Bulb||Cost per KWH||Cost per hour||Lifespan||50,000 Hour Cost||10,000 Hour Cost|
Again, not even close. However, the difference in 10,000 hours vs, 50,000 hours is that 10,000 hours is very close to a year. Just be switching to a CFL bulb you can save about 60 bucks a year.
The light is a little bit more raw, but, if you are like me, you will have a shade over the bulb. And that shade blunts the glare of the CFL to the point that you can’t tell.
At this point, the CFL wins hands down!