Halogen Lights Vs. CFL Lights
Due to the energy inefficiency of traditional incandescent light bulbs, newer and more efficient bulbs continue to enter the consumer market. Each type of bulb has benefits and drawbacks, including halogen lights and compact fluorescent lights. Does this Spark an idea?
-
Halogen Lights
-
Like traditional incandescent bulbs, halogen bulbs produce light by heating a filament. However, the halogen gas they contain causes them to burn hotter and produce a more intensely white light than traditional bulbs. They typically have a useful life of 2,250 to 3,500 hours.
Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFLs)
-
CFLs are smaller versions of fluorescent bulbs, which produce light by electrically exciting a gas mixture (e.g., mercury vapor and argon). This requires much less energy than heating a filament. Although they have a higher price than traditional light bulbs, they last for about 10,000 hours, so they're cheaper in the long run.
-
Comparison
-
The main difference between halogen lights and CFLs is their power consumption. A 300-watt halogen light can use 220 kilowatt-hours per year, whereas a 23-watt CFL typically uses a little more than 100 kilowatt-hours per year to produce roughly the same amount of light. Also, halogen lights burn at 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, which can pose a fire hazard. Because CFLs do not need to heat a filament, they operate at a much lower temperature.
-
References
- Photo Credit light bulb image by Zbigniew Nowak from Fotolia.com
More Like This
Comments
-
Possibly because now, a LOT of CFL bulbs do not have mercury, or the amount is so low it evaporates and disperses before you could inhale the fumes, you would get more mercury from eating a piece of fish than from a broken CFL.
-
a 23W CFL is equivalent to a 100W incandescent. A 300W Halogen is roughly equivalent to a 400W incandescent. Why the apples-and-oranges comparison? Wouldn't it make more sense to compare a 23W CFL to a 72W Halogen? And why did you not mention the trace amounts of mercury in the CFL?
