JackFrost wrote:Sometimes it baffles me how some people are so thickheaded towards some things that both save them money and are friendlier to the environment.
It is not a large amount of money. If I use a 60 W bulb for 8 hours a day, 200 days a year, then I waste 96 kWh a year. My cost per kWh was 1,03 Swedish crowns, so that energy cost me 99 Swedish crowns (roughly 15 USD or 11,5 Euro).
A bulb nominally lasts for 1000 hours, and the above yearly lighting time was 1600 hours, so I have to replace 1,6 bulbs. Their price varied, and I bought some recently for only 2,5 crowns a piece, but let us say that I bought them for 8 crowns, as was more normal back in the day. Then another 13 crowns went, so I am back 112 crowns for my yearly lighting sessions, which is a very small amount.
If I had been more environmental, as suggested in the quote, I could have bought a lamp with mercury, an otherwise forbidden substance due to its lethal characteristics, instead, for 29 crowns, which gives the same level of light for only 15 watts. This one officially lasts for 10000 hours, and if we assume that it is true, then we get a yearly lamp cost at 5 crowns, while the energy costs 25 crowns, so I have saved 82 crowns a year.
Unfortunately, this second lamp gives me a headache, so I cannot use it close by me. When it has gone asunder, then I will have to put it into the lamp recycling system, if it is working by then. Only half the lamps are recycled, while the rest are lost in nature, adding to the bad things humans leave behind. They are aiming for phasing out the mercury lamps in the coming years, but at the time lightbulbs were banned, LED lights were not yet available.
My yearly electricity consumption is 17191 kWh, and lighting is apparently only 0,6 % of that.