I've decided to give energy saving lightbulbs a go. I do want to reduce my impact on the environment and it strikes me that a bulb which uses a sixth of the electricity and lasts a lot longer can't be a bad thing. It's cheaper for me, probably, in the long-run, maybe.

However, my first impressions of energy saving bulbs seemed to adhere to the following logic. The bulb which uses 11w cannot possibly delivery as much brightness as its 60w "equivalent". Now, I realise that a 60w bulb isn't delivering 60w of light, but I want a bright room. Energy saving bulbs must surely save energy by lighting dimly.

I say this was my first impression. A lot of the original energy saving bulbs I saw gave off a very dim glow and, quite frankly, depressed me. Bright light is a way of keeping darkness out of your life, and a nice bright room can be very appealing. A dim-lid shadowy room feels less appealing.

The new bulbs, bought this weeked seemed also to be quite dim. At first. However, once they warm up, they start delivering a pleasing amount of brightness. However, herein is a problem. I light a hall to go up the stairs without falling over. Then I turn the light off. The energy saving bulb has barely gotten going by then. If I left the light on, it would look good, but that would be a waste of electricity. So, what I think I need is a hybrid bulb. I want one which uses a standard bright 60w bulb filament to make the room instantly light. Then, as the energy-saving mechanism gets warmed up, the old filament can be cross-faded with it and I'd never know that my 49watts of power saving has kicked in.

I doubt anyone will think to do such a thing.

Edison would have thought of it if he were around today.