Should the old style, cheap light bulb be phased out?

nickleby (Katikati)
Thursday June 19, 2008 Well, I'll be stockpiling! I have dimmers all over my house - very helpful when dealing with young children in the middle of the night! Also, completely agree with John Paul Moss - drinking and smoking should be this thorougly controlled, but there is no way any govt would tackle that particular can of worms is there? I also have issues with the mercury contained in CFL's.

JamesG (Dunedin North)
Thursday June 19, 2008 Having long been a convert to CFL, I would say that the problem is in light stores not finding, or failing to find fittings for CFLs.
Also, the bad for midnight dashes to the toilet argument is rubbish. They're great for that, slowly warming up, giving your eyes time to adjust. However, the slow warm up time is frustrating if you're going to another room of the house to find something. Overall, it's long overdue.

ILNZ (Howick)
Thursday June 19, 2008 At the begining I thought I can make some saving on changing to CFLs lights, but in fact they cost me far too much, they blow very often, they only last for around 3 - 6 months. I have at lease replaced 20 blown ones in the last two years, last week alone, there are 5 all gone in one night, I think I should switch back to the old style one.

Martin Kramer (Ellerslie)
Thursday June 19, 2008 Yes, how ridiculous. We buy the light bulbs we pay the power bill it should be our choice which type of bulb we wish to use.

What is the solution to high powered outdoor lighting?

An unreliable power supply is a symptom of a third world country.

This government is a joke and should focus on the serious problems this country has.

Richard (Timaru)
Thursday June 19, 2008 We have removed these energy saving, mercury polluting light bulbs from our house. Why? Because they were responsible for giving us headaches. What happens when we are forced to buy these types of bulbs when they affect our health? Am I going to be forced to use lightbulbs that cause a number of people to get headaches?

Dane (Lower Hutt)
Thursday June 19, 2008 Very annoyed. Replaced all bulbs in January with "long-life, energy efficient" bulbs. Quite expensive, but already 4 have blown.

Odette (Kohimarama)
Thursday June 19, 2008 Yet again the government has embarked on another half baked scheme - these bulbs contain high levels of mercury which is toxic. In the event that one of these bulbs breaks (the Us energy Protection Agency or APN) recommend that everyone including pets leave the room with the windows open for 15 mins before re-enetering the room to clean up. You should touch the broken bulb, instead use tape to pick up the broken pieces and residue. The remants should be sealed in a glass jar with a mental lid for disposal and taped shut. This precaution is designed to stop the poisoning landfils. If we work off the assumption that every NZer is smart enough to follow the right procedures (yeah right) - how many of us have jars and duct tape lying around? It begs the question. how do we dispose of the spent bulbs given the toxicity? How many would break on the way to the land fill? Has anyone looked past the workable life of the bulbs to see if they could be more trouble than they are worth.? It's beside the fact that they are at best "ugly" and it's a known fact fluro lighting increases stress on the eyes. A dreary chandelier or going to the bathroom in the dark is the least of our worries.

Rick Dias (Auckland Central)
Thursday June 19, 2008 I am pretty sure I have seen some energy saying light bulbs can be dim in a few big hardware stores but they are relatively expensive.

John Paul Moss (Auckland)
Thursday June 19, 2008 If the government can ban light bulbs just like that, why can't we ban cigarettes & RTD's? - The cost to society financially far outweighs the savings that would be made in banning light bulbs, let alone the overall social costs.

If it's about freedom of choice, well damn it I want an incandescent light bulb to dim & light my chandelier! - But you're telling me by banning them to save me money? Well how about you ban cigarettes & save serious money, thousands of lives & countless broken hearts. I'm sure no one spends $10 a day on damn light bulbs! What about $2.50 a can rocket booze? Ban them & save smashed women's faces, punched infants, mutilated innocent drivers, increased obesity and incompetent teenage parents. Let alone that again, I am sure no one spends even $20 a week on light bulbs!

Don't even mention the carbon foot-print issues surrounding the above.

Am I missing something here? I simply just don't get it.

Logical (Howick)
Thursday June 19, 2008 There are a lot of barbs in this one.
Candle lamps (as used in small fittings and chandeliers) have no alternative small enough.
The colour rendition of the cheap CFLs is rubbish so some colours of furnishings will be distorted.
They take far too long to come up to full light output so the best idea is to leave them on.
I am told there may be some radio disturbance depending on stability of the electronics.
One 'half way house' is to use low voltage halogen which can be up to 2.5 times as efficient as incandescents and have good quality light output but notquite as good as CFLs.

Submit a comment

More Articles:

Next Your Views Story: Was the decision to end the second England vs Black Caps one-day game fair?

Your Views Homepage

---