Wal-Mart is aiming to more than double its sales of compact fluorescent bulbs to more than 100 million a year, according to The New York Times.

Replacing 100 million incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent alternatives would cut $3 billion in electricity costs, based on a 75 percent reduction per bulb. That translates to 450 pounds less of greenhouse gases produced over the lifetime of each bulb.

While the NYTimes article rightfully points out that the bulbs contain mercury (recycle!) and could result in jobs losses, we also need to consider the cost for Wal-Mart in the long term, and the overall energy impact.

Wal-Mart might see a temporary earnings boost as people convert to the more expensive bulbs, but in subsequent years they will be selling fewer bulbs, which could put a dent (albeit slight) in their sales.

Also, switching light bulbs could reduce the overall demand in energy during the day and early evening hours, which theoretically could be enough of an impact to lower utility prices for everyone. Lighting currently consumes 19 percent of all electricity, according to the International Energy Agency, and getting rid of all incandescent bulbs could cut electricity use by 10 percent. LED (light emitting diode) lights aren't what they are cracked up to be, according to the Department of Energy and personal observations.