Incandescent Light Bulbs to Start Being Phased Out in 2012

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter CAC1001
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the government's decision to phase out incandescent light bulbs in favor of compact fluorescent bulbs, starting in 2012. Participants explore the implications of this mandate, questioning the rationale behind regulating consumer choices based on energy efficiency and discussing potential slippery slopes regarding government intervention in other products.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the government's authority to mandate specific consumer products, comparing it to regulations on lead-free paint and unleaded petrol.
  • Concerns are raised about the efficiency argument for banning incandescent bulbs, with some arguing that it does not justify such regulation since the bulbs are not inherently dangerous.
  • Others highlight the potential dangers of widespread use of inefficient lighting, suggesting that the cumulative effect of energy waste could pose a risk to the community.
  • Participants express dissatisfaction with the aesthetics of compact fluorescent bulbs compared to traditional incandescent bulbs.
  • Some argue that the government could extend its regulatory power to other products, such as SUVs and fast food, based on similar efficiency or health arguments.
  • There are calls for improvements in the technology of energy-efficient bulbs to better mimic the light quality of incandescent bulbs.
  • One participant suggests that if energy-efficient bulbs were proven to be significantly cheaper and longer-lasting, they might support a ban on incandescent bulbs.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions, with no clear consensus on the appropriateness of the government's mandate or the implications of such regulations. Disagreement exists regarding the justification for banning incandescent bulbs based on energy efficiency and the potential dangers of inefficient lighting.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various examples of government regulations and their implications, but the discussion remains speculative regarding the broader consequences of phasing out incandescent bulbs.

  • #241
Sorry if this has been covered already, because I didn't read the whole thread. All the ceiling lamps in my house are on dimmer switches. Will I have to replace my switches, or buy special bulbs? Thank you for any advice.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #242
Here in Argentina since the 1st of June you can't buy any light bulb over 25 watts.
I had 1 compact fluorescent lamp since more than 3 years and it died yesterday. When I bought a new one I asked the seller where I have to trash my dead compact fluorescent lamp since it contains mercury. He said there's no place in the country so that I have to trash it like a regular item. :/ He said I shouldn't trash more than 1 at once, due to mercury for the environment. I find this ridiculous for the environment...
What do you think?
 
  • #243
mikelepore said:
Sorry if this has been covered already, because I didn't read the whole thread. All the ceiling lamps in my house are on dimmer switches. Will I have to replace my switches, or buy special bulbs? Thank you for any advice.

You will need to change to CFLs that are meant to be used with a dimmer switch. GE has them on the market now.

http://www.acehardwareoutlet.com/ProductDetails.aspx?SKU=3237120
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #244
fluidistic said:
Here in Argentina since the 1st of June you can't buy any light bulb over 25 watts.
I had 1 compact fluorescent lamp since more than 3 years and it died yesterday. When I bought a new one I asked the seller where I have to trash my dead compact fluorescent lamp since it contains mercury. He said there's no place in the country so that I have to trash it like a regular item. :/ He said I shouldn't trash more than 1 at once, due to mercury for the environment. I find this ridiculous for the environment...
What do you think?

You are right it is ridiculous.

The mercury situation is something that someone didn't think through properly. All of the CFL bulbs sold in the USA have a disposal warning on the label, yet there is no disposal infrastructure in place.

New LED bulbs are being developed that are even more efficient than CFLs and last even longer. As a matter of fact most LED lights just grow dimmer over time rather than quit working all of a sudden.

The downside is that it is difficult to get even light distribution out of LEDs. They require multiple individual LEDs in each bulb.
 
  • #245
mikelepore said:
Sorry if this has been covered already, because I didn't read the whole thread. All the ceiling lamps in my house are on dimmer switches. Will I have to replace my switches, or buy special bulbs? Thank you for any advice.
You could do either, or install fixtures or socket adapters which will accept still-legal "specialty" incandescent bulbs, which includes all bulbs below 40W.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #246
I don't agree with banning incandescents. Energy inefficiency doesn't hurt anyone by itself, it's the pollution from the power plant that does. The government should regulate that, not ban specific technologies.
 
  • #247
Opus_723 said:
I don't agree with banning incandescents. Energy inefficiency doesn't hurt anyone by itself, it's the pollution from the power plant that does. The government should regulate that, not ban specific technologies.
It was done because of lobbying by *green* environmental groups.
 
  • #248
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. I'm something of an environmentalist myself. Nothing wrong with the end, it's just the means I don't agree with. Just because I agree with them about regulating pollution doesn't mean I agree with banning incandescent light bulbs.
 
  • #249
There has been some resistance to the energy efficiency Borg, I am happy to see:

Sen Paul said:
I'm all for energy conservation. But [...] You come instead with fines, threats of jail, you put people out of business ... This is what your energy efficiency standards are. Call it what it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvl961uDoEg
 
Last edited:
  • #250
Also, while I'm opposed to the law, I should point out that it's not technically a ban. It simply requires an improvement in efficiency that most incandescents can't achieve. Some can. So there will still be incandescents on the market. Probably not nearly as many though.
 
  • #251
Opus_723 said:
... I should point out that it's not technically a ban. It simply requires an improvement in efficiency that most incandescents can't achieve. Some can. ...
Yep. Lower wattage and less light will work. But I'm still in favor of CFLs even with their drawbacks.
 
  • #252
Also, while I'm opposed to the law, I should point out that it's not technically a ban.

How do you define a ban, exactly?

Or, put another way, how would you finish this sentence: the law BLANK the sale of light bulbs that don't meet minimum energy efficiency standards.

A. Encourages
B. Discourages
C. Talks about
D. Taxes
E. Bans

What the law doesn't do is ban the sale of all incandescent bulbs, granted. But is most certainly is a ban on the sale of light bulbs that use more than an allowed wattage. Technically.
 
  • #253
Yeah. You got me. Technically.

Sure, you can call an efficiency requirement a ban. Whatever floats your boat. I only meant to point out that it doesn't ban incandescents specifically. I apologize for my poor word choice. I have shamed my family.
 
  • #254
dlgoff said:
Yep. Lower wattage and less light will work. But I'm still in favor of CFLs even with their drawbacks.

The CFLs don't always last seven years like it says on the package. Some of mine were gone in a month. A couple were smoking when they went out. I suspect the market is being flooded with the cheapest chinese clones.
 
  • #255
The vast majority of Americans will pay no attention to this until they go to the store next year and discover the unavailability of the bulbs they want. I predict increased sales of "Change your leaders, not your light bulbs" T-shirts next year.

Skippy
 
  • #256
GODISMYSHADOW said:
The CFLs don't always last [...] like it says on the package...
Same is true for incandescents. And everything else.
 
  • #257
mheslep said:
Same is true for incandescents. And everything else.
Was this post prompted by the thread asking how many forum members does it take to change a light bulb?
 
  • #260
I suspect the market is being flooded with the cheapest chinese clones.

That's where Jeff Immelt (GE) moved the manufacturing for CFL's when he closed down US incandescent manufacturing. He's Obama's Job Czar.
 
  • #261
mheslep said:
Same is true for incandescents. And everything else.

this has not been my experience. CFLs have been much worse.
 
  • #262
When I switched to CFLs a few years ago, most were horrible! The hues themselves made me feel sick to the pit of my stomach, and I switched back.

More recently, I tried them again, and was happy to find some brands and selections that are nearly indistinguishable from my incandescent bulbs. The only locations I'm still using incandescent bulbs are the spots in my kitchen, a flood in my dining room, and another flood in the entrance way.

There are CFL spots/floods, but I'm not enjoying the colors available. Hopefully, improvements are around the corner.
 
  • #263
Proton Soup said:
this has not been my experience. CFLs have been much worse.
I wouldn't say I've seen many not "lasting". Their lifespans are supposed to be on the order of 10,000 hours, so if they burn out before a year, they are just plain duds. And I've had an unreasonably high fraction of duds -- 20-30% would be my guess.

...but I have seen a few not "lasting". Based on the condition of the casings, I'd say mostly due to overheating in enclosed fixtures.
 
  • #264
Meanwhile, I am reading this thread and still hoping for an opinion on led lights, seems that they don't have a better lm/W ratio, but offer lifetimes up to 50kHr. Anyone tried this for house lighting?
 
  • #265
DoggerDan said:
When I switched to CFLs a few years ago, most were horrible! The hues themselves made me feel sick to the pit of my stomach, and I switched back.

More recently, I tried them again, and was happy to find some brands and selections that are nearly indistinguishable from my incandescent bulbs. The only locations I'm still using incandescent bulbs are the spots in my kitchen, a flood in my dining room, and another flood in the entrance way.

There are CFL spots/floods, but I'm not enjoying the colors available. Hopefully, improvements are around the corner.

From what I've read, you can get CFLs now that work about as good as incandescents now, the thing is that they cost a lot more at the moment. Same with LEDs. You can also buy high-efficiency incandescents that meet the new standards, but again, they cost a lot more. On CFLs, I personally hate the twisty shape of them. They have them with a regular bulb covering, but these are just twisty bulbs with a covering over the twisty part (you can see the twisty part through the covering).
 
  • #266
Well a halogen incandescent costs maybe 2 or 3X more than a regular incandescent of similar lumens, while an LED costs maybe 25X more.
 
  • #269
Well, the last American light bulb factory has already been shut down. Good job, environmentalists!

Skippy
 
  • #270
I personally only have two incandescent lights left in my entire home: one in the oven and one in the freezer. I have CFL or LED in all other places and I love them. I won't go back to incandescent myself.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Do light bulbs or convection heaters heat a room with the highest efficiency?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
12K