A bulb a day keeps the climate at bay: Wal-Mart to push CFLs

Are there downsides to the retail giant’s efforts to up sales of CFLs? 17

We've heard scads about Wal-Mart turning over a big, fat green leaf (here and here and here and probably lots of other places, too).

Well, here's another one reported by Fast Company that really left my jaw hanging open:

In the next 12 months, starting with a major push this month, Wal-Mart wants to sell every one of its regular customers -- 100 million in all -- one swirl bulb. In the process, Wal-Mart wants to change energy consumption in the United States, and energy consciousness, too.

Of course they've got the old self-interest motive going:

It also aims to change its own reputation, to use swirls to make clear how seriously Wal-Mart takes its new positioning as an environmental activist.

But that's still a s**tload of energy saved. It's a doubling of CFL sales in 1 year! In terms of energy savings, it stacks up like this:

[110,000,000 60 watt replacements are] enough electricity saved to power all the homes in Delaware and Rhode Island ... one bulb [in every household] is equivalent to taking 1.3 million cars off the roads.

There's lots of interesting data and commentary in the article -- about the ripple effects of a shift to CFLs, why GE might be eager to partner with Wal-Mart on a project that could hit them hard, and how Wal-Mart is thinking about this effort.

A switch to CFLs could represent a stabilization wedge of its own, and potentially could send big positive signals throughout society that efficiency matters. I'm certainly sensitive to concerns about Wal-Mart, especially their labor practices (note: this article mentions as a cost -- not labor -- issue that CFLs require Chinese laborers to hand twist the tubes). However, a shift to CFLs seems like a really big step in the right direction.

Anyone want to comment on the downsides?

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement

  1. lcc21 Posted 1:52 pm
    30 Aug 2006

    A bulbWow.  If i were not worried about Wal-Mart as a huge corporate monster, I am now.  That much of a pull over our world for good or bad is startling.  I think it is really great that they are pushing swirl bulbs, Wal-Mart is where I buy my swirl bulbs.  This was a real eye opener for me, I am almost commentless except for the WOW factor and the feeble croak that Thank Goodness they are on our side, sorta, at least in this case.

    Permalink

  2. bookerly Posted 8:41 pm
    30 Aug 2006

    Good Thing

       This does show the advantage of large organizations.  They can have a big impact with one stroke of the keyboard (so to speak).
       We can fear their size and criticize other practices, but we should say...
       "Good move, Wal-mart."
       It's the fair thing to do.
    patrick

    Permalink

  3. embello Posted 8:50 pm
    30 Aug 2006

    Small steps!Good move Wal-mart!  Wal-mart, is one of those good and bad kind of things in our culture......the bad obviously being the overseas exploitation, the cheap chemical products, and the over-run of small local businesses; and the good being the one-stop shoping, little travel to get most of the things you need=less carbon emissions from your car, and fewer paved surfaces means less junk getting into our waterways....I think this little push toward more efficient lighting tips the scales to good side, maybe even the really good side!!
    Small steps!

    Elizabeth Bello

    Marketing Executive

    (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

    //
    var l=new Array();

    var output = '';

    l[0]='>';l[1]='a';l[2]='/';l[3]='';l[24]='\"';l[25]=' 109';l[26]=' 111';l[27]=' 99';l[28]=' 46';l[29]=' 108';l[30]=' 105';l[31]=' 97';l[32]=' 109';l[33]=' 116';l[34]=' 111';l[35]=' 104';l[36]=' 64';l[37]=' 111';l[38]=' 108';l[39]=' 108';l[40]=' 101';l[41]=' 98';l[42]=' 109';l[43]=' 101';l[44]=':';l[45]='o';l[46]='t';l[47]='l';l[48]='i';l[49]='a';l[50]='m';l[51]='\"';l[52]='=';l[53]='f';l[54]='e';l[55]='r';l[56]='h';l[57]='a ';l[58]='

    Permalink

  4. designgrizzly Posted 5:32 am
    31 Aug 2006

    long-term opportunitiesFor all the reasons already posted and outlined, this is a great thing.  However, I have yet to see anything about the long-term effects of this initiative.  Wal-Mart and GE are taking a bold step here, but I would challenge them (as if they'd really listen..) to take it a step further.
    All 1.5 billion or however many of these bulbs will end up in landfills.  I would like to see a product takeback initiative organized by Wal-Mart and GE, so that in 8 years, when my bulbs burn out, I can take them back to Wal-Mart, and they will be appropriately processed.
    This will be a design challenge for GE, but most likely worth it in the long run.  Can they reuse the tiny dots of mercury?  Probably.  What about the phosphor?  Maybe not, but they can probably remove it from the glass and recycle that for new bulbs.  Ballast components?  Some of those can probably be re-used, including the plastic housings.  The possibilities are there, and ripe for exploitation - and would probably pay for themselves in materials and manufacturing savings.
    This type of product stewardship initiative would make me really excited about this news.

    Permalink

  5. tsbremer Posted 10:50 am
    31 Aug 2006

    Wal-Mart's green campaignBefore we get too enthusiastic with our applause for Wal-Mart's campaign to promote CFLs, let us not forget that their primary concern is how the enhanced public image impacts profits.  In that light, it is helpful to be mindful that all such corporate moves are carefully calculated responses to the marketplace, and it is the hard work of dedicated activists who have made issues like this salient in the marketplace.
    The real applause is due all who have dedicated themselves to making the public aware of these issues to the point where corporate megagiants take notice and realize the profitability of jumping on the bandwagon.
    Keep up the good work Grist and everyone working in the trenches.

    Permalink

  6. Kif Scheuer Posted 11:10 am
    31 Aug 2006

    kudos tsbremer for shining on the envirosI started reading your post and thought "here we go again another grumpy enviro who can't give an inch to the evil corporations." Then you surprised me shouting out to the activists who have built the momentum that companies like Wal-Mart are responding to. You're so right - Wal-Mart didn't do this alone, it's committed environmentalists banging on the walls of corporate America as well as those seeding change from within who deserve applause here (and here too)

    Permalink

  7. caniscandida Posted 7:07 pm
    31 Aug 2006

    "swirl bulb"An amazing oxymoron, but what the hell, it works.  Obviously it communicates much better than the (generally, though not among Grist readers!) little understood and poorly remembered "CFL."  So fine, I am on board.  Still, it makes me lose my breath, that these words for completely different shapes get thrown together so easily.
    On Wal-Mart: One and a half cheers for them, and may their greening all do us some good.  Still, we must realize we are all being selfish, so long as we ignore their disgraceful treatment of their employees.
    I shall not buy from them, no matter how cheap they go, until they advance from being green to having a heart for their employees.  Fortunately, I have a number of small shops within walking distance from which I can, and do, buy my swirl bulbs.

    Chickens are our cousins!

    So are other sensitive animals!

    Enough is enough!

    No more factory farms!

    Permalink

  8. Biodiversivist's avatar

    Biodiversivist Posted 1:28 am
    01 Sep 2006

    I gave up on swirl bulbsThe ones in my den start out dim, then slowly brighten up, but never get as bright as reguluar bulbs. They also do not fit in most of my light fixtures because they are bigger. Have these issues been fixed?

    In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com

    Permalink

  9. kmp Posted 1:39 am
    01 Sep 2006

    My guilty secretI must confess, I'm not that fond of "swirl bulbs." (Thanks, Canis, for pointing out what was bothering me about that moniker).
    I have them in the garage and out on the deck... but the limitations are kind of annoying.  I have floodlights (3) that light up the outside of the garage and yet, despite a thorough search, and hearing that such things exist, I have not been able to find CFL floodlights.  The majority of lights in my home are on a dimmer switch, and again, despite rumors that dimmer-compatible CFLs exist, I was unable to locate any, either at any of the three local hardware stores I tried, various online vendors, or even at my very first visit to the annoyingly big-box Home Depot.
    I tried one out in one of the few non-dimmer lights in the house... in the bathroom.  Ick.  The quality of light, is, well, flourescent.  Shocking, I know.  But, really, I look bad enough in the morning as is; morning me lit by flourescent lighting is just too much to take.

    Permalink

  10. Howell Haus's avatar

    Howell Haus Posted 3:59 am
    01 Sep 2006

    Wal-Mart - The Big Pusher...My thoughts align with several comments already made, like the take-back program (tons of mercury in these things, collectively). William McDonough points out in his book 'Cradle to Cradle' that consumption is not a bad thing, provided the contents can be used again. If Wal-Mart wants to push these, then they should in turn subsidize (through pennies set aside) a program for collection of 'any CFL' and institute a 'Cradle2' operation.
    For those who don't like hideous CFL colors, can't get them to fit into your existing fixtures, think they're too bulky, or are less than tickled with the performance - please, check out the specs before you buy. We did, and consequently spent more for the next generation Panasonic bulbs that are designed for use in enclosed fixtures. The enemy of electronics is heat. These bulbs are designed to survive higher heat situations, which in my mind tells me it will have a longer life. That's partially the intent of this exercise is to reduce consumption of not just energy, but turnover too. I've had some less-than-satisfying experiences with big-box store CFL's. I'm very happy with the Panasonics.
    Now, when you decide to go and get your CFL's to cut your energy costs, be sure and ride your bike.  Every time you ride, you Cut consumption. That's the topic of our blog and we hope you'll come see and comment. As for me and mine, we'll see you out there on our bikes, of course...

    JD & Kelley Howell of

    Palm Harbor, FL

    visit us: Cut20.blogspot.com

    Permalink

  11. caniscandida Posted 4:07 am
    01 Sep 2006

    quality of life and lightRight, there are times when they do not quite get as bright as they ought.  I myself am very satisfied with ours, but my Michael is not.  He likes bright ceiling illumination, but I hate that, and prefer eye-level lights -- just another little thing we quarrel about.  I shall try to sneak another one into the dining room ceiling fixture, and see if he notices.

    Chickens are our cousins!

    So are other sensitive animals!

    Enough is enough!

    No more factory farms!

    Permalink

  12. Pandu Posted 5:40 am
    01 Sep 2006

    short-lived

    I use these bulbs in most of the light fixtures in my house, but they seem to burn out in about a year.  I usually buy the more reputable name-brands, and I don't know what's the problem.  Recently I got the idea to label them with a date whenever I put a new one in, so I know just how long they last. Fortunately they're getting cheaper, but now I've got a box full of dead bulbs waiting to go somewhere.

    Permalink

  13. Kif Scheuer Posted 10:32 am
    01 Sep 2006

    old houses and CFLsPandu, is your house old? Do you have old wiring? I've lived in a couple 20s era houses and had pretty spotty luck with CFLs. I also burn out incandescent bulbs quickly. I've always wondered if old wiring leads to irregular currents which are hard on the electronics of CFLS. Any truth to this theory, or is it just my bad luck?
    I've switched over in my current house but I had one burn out in less than a month. I didn't put a CFL back in that socket and I'll see how the rest hold up.

    Permalink

  14. detroit58 Posted 4:38 am
    09 Sep 2006

    CFL'sSo, Walmart is trying to push 110,000,000 compact fluorescent light bulbs on its customers. Have they made arrangements to take them back when they burn out ?  I understand they are considered hazardous waste because of the small amount of mercury and fluor they contain. Or will all those bulbs wind up at the dump and contaminate ?

    Permalink

  15. Maywa Montenegro Posted 5:39 am
    19 Sep 2006

    Stabilization Wedge...Hi Kif---don't know if you will read this anymore, but I don't see an email address available for you. I am wondering where you found the data to suppport

    "A switch to CFLs could represent a stabilization wedge of its own"----how many CFLs are being counted  here? Over what time period of usage?

      Thanks....I am not meaning to attack, I'm just tryint to put together an article of my own and a comparison with Socolow's wedges but be useful...

    Permalink

  16. gearsy Posted 9:36 am
    19 Sep 2006

    Solar floodlightsTo kmp: Did you know you can get solar floodlights that get energy from the sun during the day and come on automatically at night?  Zero emissions, zero electricity used, and no need to search for CFL floodlights!

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed it's the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead

    Permalink

  17. Kif Scheuer Posted 9:56 am
    17 Oct 2006

    just tossing off ideasMaywa - just saw your post from aways back. Um I think I was just speculating about CFLs being a stabilization wedge of their own. I don't know how much each wedge is supposed to account for, (~1GtC/year?) either on an annual basis or over the projected time frame, but if we switched out to CFLs in short order I think it would make a pretty big dent.
    Sorry I don't have data to back up my proposal. In some sense each literal wedge is made up of many different miniwedges, so in that sense any wholescale change could be considered as a wedge of it's own. I'm guessing that dividing the entire triangle into 10 pieces is a convienent graphical tool.

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement