Learn how we are working to transform how we use and produce energy.
Comparison of Life Cycle Analyses of Compact Fluorescent and Incandescent Lamps Based on the Rated Life of Compact Fluorescent Lamps
Why we share this work for free
RMI is an independent nonprofit working to accelerate the clean energy transition. We publish research like this to inform decision-makers and drive real-world impact.
Our work is supported by philanthropy as well as partnerships, including fee-for-service engagements. This support makes it possible for us to share our independent insights for free.
If you find this work valuable, you can support it anytime.
Get more insights like this
Stay up to date with the latest research, analysis, and tools from RMI by opting in to receive occasional emails below. You’ll get new reports, event invitations, and practical insights to help us all accelerate the clean energy transition.
Loading form...
Your download should start automatically. If it doesn’t, click the download button below.
This work is made possible by philanthropy
RMI is a nonprofit supported by donors and partners. Philanthropy enables us to produce independent research and make resources like this freely available.
If you find this report valuable, please consider supporting our work. You can also explore how we partner with organizations to drive impact.
Jump to Section
This paper addresses the debate over compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) and incandescents through life cycle analysis (LCA) conducted in the SimaPro1 life cycle analysis program. It compares the environmental impacts of providing a given amount of light (approximately 1,600 lumens) from incandescents and CFLs for 10,000 hours. Special attention has been paid to recently raised concerns regarding CFLs—specifically that their complex manufacturing process uses so much energy that it outweighs the benefits of using CFLs, that turning CFLs on and off frequently eliminates their energy-efficiency benefits, and that they contain a large amount of mercury. The research shows that the efficiency benefits compensate for the added complexity in manufacturing, that while rapid on-off cycling of the lamp does reduce the environmental (and payback) benefits of CFLs they remain a net “win,” and that the mercury emitted over a CFL’s life—by power plants to power the CFL and by leakage on disposal—is still less than the mercury that can be attributed to powering the incandescent.
About the Authors
Related Insights
What Michigan’s Clean Community Financing Ecosystem Can Teach Other US Regions
Appliance Efficiency Standards: A Proven Tool for Affordability and Grid Reliability
Help build the clean energy future. Donate today.
Independent research. Real-world solutions. Supported by donors.
RMI can pursue the highest-impact climate and energy solutions because we’re supported by people who believe change is possible. Every gift helps advance the work needed to make clean energy the default choice worldwide.
For other ways to give to RMI, including checks or gifts of stock, please visit Other Ways to Give.
