If we all start using eco bulbs then I suggest we all start using night vision goggles, because the eco bulbs are useless. The box told me that it gave out the same level of light. The box was WRONG, I tried them. The bulbs were terrible, I could barely see to the other side of the room. It could save you money on your bills but you would spend the rest off your life in and out of hospital because you don’t have fluorescent walls and furniture. Save yourself a trip to the hospital use normal bulbs.

peter h, london,

Phasing out incandescent lamps is one thing, but this is the 'green banning brigade' thin end of the wedge. Next will be halogen lamps used for security lighting, then metal halide used extensively for retail lighting....And of course energy saving lamps can't be dimmed, which itself was an effective energy saving technique. It's time for sane people everywhere to stand up and say enough is enough with this eco-fundamentalism. Our politicians have swallowed this rubbish for long enough, but that's a politician's nature.

L. Saunders, edinburgh,

With regards to compact fluorescents being dim, ignore the equivalent filament power on the packaging and use a general 4:1 ratio, so a 25W exposed tube compact fluorescent will be similar output to 100W perl bulb. The comparisons on the packaging are against softtone filament bulbs, which aren't what most people use (call it marketing B-S if you want). An outer glass envelope type will lose a tiny bit in the extra glass layer, but will work better in a cold or windy position where the extra glass bulb helps the tube stay warm.

The 4:1 ratio doesn't work for reflector types. For the larger ones, 3:1 would be nearer, and for the smaller ones, they can be as low as 2:1. This is because a folded compact fluorescent tube is far from an ideal shaped light source for designing a reflector. One exception here is the GE Genura 23W floodlamp, which uses a different technology and produces slightly more light than a 100W floodlamp, after a short warm up period.

Andrew Gabriel, Fleet, UK

The claims being made from Brussels and especially Tony Blair over benefits of switching over to low energy bulbs are grossly exaggerated. Most peoples experience of either type of bulb is that the quoted life span is overstated by a factor of 2 or 3 and the cost of them won't fall by much. The supposed light output is also exaggerated by manufacturers and is not as intense. Next, there doesn't seem to be any environment costs of the more complex manufacturing plant and components of low energy version. No mention is made of either low voltage or mains voltage Halogen bulbs which produce around 50% more light than their tungsten equivalent and the fact that light fittings for these types of bulbs CAN NOT take low energy bulbs. The main point seems to have been lost on Blair in that at least 90% of electricity consumption is from heating & cooking rather than lighting. Yes, there will be some savings in pollution & running costs but only around 3-5% if you're very lucky.

Mike, Denia, Spain

Fine. Nearly all mine are now energy saving. I don't need a ladder to change them. They don't seem to be as bright so go for brighter ones. Some take time to warm up. The technology is improving all the time and so are the shapes.

BUT fluorescent lamps are classed as HAZARDOUS WASTE and our local authority for one has not provided a nearby facility for their collection. Urgent action needs to be taken on this.

Philippa, London, UK

I hope they can invent one that actually gives an equivalent amount of light to the incandescent bulb. At the moment they cant. In my studio I use halogen spot lights and in the rest of the house different typesof bulbs. But to read by I need a 100 watt plus bulb. The equivalent 20 watt eco bulb is too weak, and the 30 watt version does not fit into the antique lamps i have. So the next two years will be plagued by peiople hoarding light bulbs as they hoarded leaded petrol a few years ago,

P Santamaria, granada, spain

But do not replace with single spiral type as these appear
prone to early failure in cold weather at switch on. Presumably lower temperature reducing resistance and
resultant increase in voltage etc is the cause. Have had
two go this year , but no problems with bulb type or
multiple drop tube equivalents which have been in service fault free for several years.

Myopia, Beccles, UK

This is going to save the glaciers?

Jay, columbus,oh, us

Would this be the same EU that imposes an Anti-Dumping Levy on energy saving lamps that are not made by favoured companies - making them more expensive for the consumer ?

T, Shanghai, China

What you don't say is that the energy efficient bulbs contain mercury and thus will be an ecological hazard when the time comes to dispose of them.

Colin Wilson, Lower Hutt, New Zealand

Fluorescents produce a harsh, hideous light. They have been tied to childhood leukemia and other health problems ("disproven" of course in industry-funded counter studies, just like cellphone radiation danger) -- and many people simply get eye strain and feel tired in rooms lit with them. They also contain toxic mercury which poisons the environment when the bulbs are discarded, unless they are collected without breakage and properly recycled -- logistically an almost impossibly complex and expensive undertaking.

Then there's this thing called democracy -- and what more direct vote of the people is there than what they choose to spend their money on, given two options in front of them. If fluorescents were desirable for everyone in society -- everyone in society would already be using them.

Sam Lowry, Brazil,