Do compact florescent lights (CFLs) really save you energy costs $$$ during the winter?

Nope. While there is some logic to your thought, a detailed calculation shows that it ain't so.

When electricity is produced in the power plant, only roughly 40% of the energy in the fuel (coal, natural gas or oil) is converted to electricity. 60% is waste heat which the plant gets rid off with cooling towers or by heating a river.

But if you burn the same fuel (coal, natural gas or oil) in your home furnace, approx. 80-90% of the energy in the fuel get converted into useful heat (the rest goes through the chimney). So you have a factor of two of an advantage over the power plant.

But economically the situation is worse, much worse, actually. Because the cost for the fuel is only a small part of the total cost of running a power plant with the facility cost, electricity grid, customer service etc. making up much if not most of the price YOU pay for electricity, your electricity bill is much higher for the same amount of energy than your natural gas or oil bill.

In case of my personal bill there is an almost tenfold difference between the price of electricity and the price of heat from natural gas. If I had to heat my house with electricity I would almost go broke in winter. And some people actually do. In some places of the US electricity companies used to sell electricity for heating for a fraction of the usual tariffs. Recently these electricity companies stopped the practice and started charging regular prices. The people who had bought into the scheme in the past now have a choice between remodeling and paying thousands of dollars a month for their heating.

CFLs really save energy. And they really save you money. Big time. Look at your heating and electricity bill and do the calculations yourself. You will be surprised.

The CA argument is just as lame as the Gore argument, by the way. All it shows is intellectual laziness by whoever uses it. Now... since you thought about the issue logically, I won't charge you with intellectual laziness. You tried and you almost got it right. That is far, far better than not even trying, which is what people who use the anti-green slogans do.

Rosie, With regard to the enslavement comment, he does have a point. Your original question implies that you are concerned about global warming, you think it's a problem, and you are now wondering what you can do about it. I hope that's right because that appears to be your thinking right now. Now let's talk hypothetically for a minute. Let's say we are now in a period of global cooling. And through further research we discover that this period of cooling is due to reduced solar activity and sunspot activity combined with a 30 year cool phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation? Now let's fast forward to 2020 where global temperatures are slowly going down and are predicted to continue a downward cooling trend until at least 2050. This is going to cause great hardship on mankind, much more than any warming would have. So now here we are in 2020 and we look back at 2009 and try to figure out why you thought you had to reduce CO2 or whatever else man was doing in the belief that man was doing most of the warming the planet when all along mother nature had control of (most of) the climate just like always. Then you need to look at how you came to that wrong belief. This is where enslavement comes into play again. Enslavement is getting someone to follow a doctrine to the benefit of the person dictating the doctrine. This usually sounds sinister at first glance, but if you studied history at all you can find the road to hell littered with well meaning people and ideas. And just note, that one of the features of a doctrine of this nature is that is presented as good and right and even moral and any contrary opinion is something to be reviled. Also note that science does not work in that manner. In the end, I'm not saying this is true for you and climate change, but you'd be niave not to at least give it a little serious thought about if not for your current cause but how you choose to follow subsequent causes. Be independent, thoughtful, curious and objective.

If one uses electric heat, your hypothesis makes sense, even so, one can get more light for a given amount of electricity with CFL and the additional light might have some benefits itself.

But if you are burning fuel for heat, the previous answer explains very well why using light bulbs for heat isn't doesn't make so much sense.