|
The answer is YES.
If fossil fuel is used to power an incandescent
bulb then it will emit more mercury into the environment than a single CFL
which is recycled.
Low frequency AM is not used often in New Zealand
and so interference from a CFL wouldn’t be as obtrusive as if it
interfered with FM signals.
CFLs are better for the environment than incandescent lamps.
However there are alternatives to CFLs which may be even greener (see Further Reading on Light
Emitting Diodes).
Because CFLs operate
differently to incandescent lamps it is difficult to make an exact
comparison.
It is up to the consumer to decide whether a
CFL or an incandescent lamp is better suited to their need.
The following conclusions can be considered
when making this decision:
Other Conclusions
- CFLs
are more energy efficient
than incandescent lamps.
- CFL’s are not suitable
for all areas where lighting is needed.
- The average
retail price of a CFL is three times the price of an incandescent lamp
however a CFL lasts longer.
- Incandescent
lamps are easier to recycle than CFLs. However
because CFLs contain toxic chemicals they
cannot be disposed of in landfills but incandescent lamps can be.
- CFLs
do cause radio interference on lower AM frequencies. Philips and Ecobulb-brand cause the most interference. The
further away the bulb is from the radio the less Interference there will
be.
- The claims made on the packaging of bulbs are mostly accurate.
- The mercury in CFLs is a problem if bulbs
are disposed incorrectly, or are broken, because mercury has adverse
effects on human health and the environment. People need to be educated about recycling CFLs before incandescent lamps are banned.
|
