CREEDE HINSHAW: Shining a light on the numbers

I thought about Pope Francis recently while on the light bulb aisle, a place more confusing than the Bermuda Triangle.

Used to be one’s biggest decision was whether to purchase a 40-, 60- or 100-watt bulb. Now, purchasing a light bulb is loaded with so much terminology that one yearns for the days when the incandescent bulbs with the little wires that went “pop” were the only choice.

I needed five bulbs for a chandelier in our breakfast nook. One box promised their bulbs were 28 percent more efficient than a competitor’s differently manufactured bulbs. But every bulb on the aisle promised to be more efficient than somebody else.

I suppose they’re all more efficient than candles.

Most of the bulbs documented how much energy they would consume per year based on three hours of daily use, so I narrowed my search to two choices: one bulb used 90 cents of energy per year while the other bulb used $4.50 per year. A no-brainer, right?

Not actually. The bulb that used more energy was for sale only in a four-pack, while the more efficient bulb sold individually so one needed a calculator or good estimating skill to know that the more efficient bulb was also 5-6 times more expensive. And how many years would it take for the better, higher priced bulb to reach the break even point where it made economic sense to purchase?

Add to this that the more expensive bulb had a five-year warranty but promised to last – at three hours of usage per day – for 22.8 years. Keep in mind that I am 66 years old and do some quick math; consult your actuarial tables and roll the dice over whether I’d outlive those bulbs. If you want to make the equation even more complex, consider that if I used those bulbs only 1