tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31006871.post-29158270790331698892008-04-02T17:40:00.000+02:002008-04-02T17:40:00.000+02:002008-04-02T17:40:00.000+02:00I've changed most of my bulbs over to CFL's, but I've been seriously considering going back to incandescants for a while now.<BR/><BR/>The "amount of light for a given use of electricity" claim: Most CFLs claim to use only 1/5 of the electricity to produce the same amount of light, but where has this been measured? Are the candela measures the same, or simply the total flux? I tested my own perception by taking a 100W incandescant and a 20W CFL. The 100W incandescant is significantly brighter. The 20W CFL turned out to be close to a 60W incandescant. I tried with both warm and cool CFLs and found only slight differences to the perceived brightness. I have a document where it is stated that CFLs actually use about half the power of an incandescant to produce the same perceived brightness. I value my eyes, so I use a minimum of 30W to 40W when it comes to CFLs, since that approximates a 100W incandescant. Larger rooms require more.<BR/><BR/>The lifetime claim: I have yet to have a CFL last longer than an incandescant bulb. I have one sitting at home that didn't even last two months, though that one was one of the cheapies, at "only" R20 each. At 5 times the price of an incandescant (or more), they quite plainly cost more. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind paying more if it's helping the environment, but I don't like being lied to and my experience so far is that the lifetime claims aren't true.Craighttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06035662742839240847noreply@blogger.com