This is a great resource. A panel of employees from The New York Times rounded up energy-efficient light bulbs for an evaluation. Any Other Bright Ideas?
examines the many benefits of compact-fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs) and the reservations many have in adopting the more energy-efficient form of lighting. Besides complaints of buzzing and a harsh "institutional glow"
, CFLs contain mercury and should be disposed of with hazardous waste...But which bulbs are best? The team for The Times evaluated twenty-one energy efficient bulbs. Fourteen of the bulbs were CFLs and the remaining bulbs were made up of other energy-efficient bulb technology like halogen, LEDs (light-emitting diode) and even an energy-efficient incandescent. This table shows their favorites:
Here's a link to the full-sizetable
The article stresses the vast differences between energy-efficient bulbs. While some were simply awful, many performed very well. The article also explores the importance of finding different bulbs for different lighting environments. The accompanying slideshow of real-life experiences with bulbs is both interesting and helpful.
This issue got a lot of attention on AT last January, but we're interested to know which energy-efficient bulbs readers prefer. Please share your thoughts in the comments.
(Pics: Tony Cenicola)