Incandescent Light Bulbs - Which are going away When?

[Nords]

I hear he's also signing a bill to allow us to keep black & white TV's...

But would you be allowed to export them to the other states?

 

[Rustic23]

I can see there will be new federal gov. employees checking cars for light bulbs on the Texas borders! It's a jobs bill.

 

[harley]

If the Governor signs the bill Texas will have regular light bulbs. Made in Texas, and Sold only in Texas.

Doesn't matter. The SCOTUS has determined that you can't grow pot in your own home for your own use in a legal medical marijuana state (Gonzales v. Raich - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) based on the Commerce Clause, so you sure as hell won't be able to manufacture and use your own lightbulbs. It's for your own good! And to protect the kids!

 

[ERD50]

... and the 60G25 which is the 60 watt version of the globe-shaped bulb I have commonly seen used around vanity mirrors.

....

I suspect that the lighting companies have come to love this. It takes many of their highest-volume products out of the commodity-pricing world, and replaces (?) them with more-expensive units that they can run a higher margin on for some years. So just bend over, consumers, our congress knows what's best for us.

Not to mention that those many of those vanity designs really count on that style of bulb. So if the CFLs don't cut it for that application (cost, color of the light, or other aesthetics), you might end up replacing the whole vanity

It really torques me. A vanity light is only going to be on for relatively short periods. How much electricity is this really saving? Silly, silly, silly.

I think the current admin has mentioned a goal of 1 million electric cars on the road by 20xx? I read that Germany looked into this same goal (and that 1M would obviously be a much higher % of their fleet), and they figured that if they achieved it, the carbon footprint of the country would be reduced by less than 1%. So they dropped it. Makes even less sense for the US, 1M cars would be a very small % of the fleet, and with all our coal plants, it would probably be a total wash carbon-wise.

I wonder how much energy savings is going to be offset by people having to buy new fixtures (I had to cut up an outdoor fixture the other day, just to get the bigger base of a CFL to screw in all the way, it rode up on top of the rim of the fixture). Plus, all the CFLs in low use areas will never regain the extra energy required to produce the CFL in the first place - those are environmental losers on several fronts.

Gee Congress, let me decide what kind of bulb I want, and you go concentrate on something important.


-ERD50

 

[JOHNNIE36]

Half joking. My comment was just as "serious" as any suggestion that someone would actually jump through the necessary warranty hoops to get a refund (for unused service life) on a $2 CFL. People buy the CFL bulbs based on the claimed life, and (in my experience) they often don't live nearly that long.
I like the CFLs for many purposes, and I'm using them for those. There are some jobs, however, for which they are ill-suited (don't work as well or at all, do not have a favorable payback period, or even result in more energy use than an incandescent bulb.) I'd like the option to buy the right bulb for the right job.
And I'd really like to know why the federal government believes they have any authority to regulate this activity. There are lots of things we'd like people to do (be nice to each other, eat more leafy vegetables) and not do (swear around small children, drive recklessly), but we don't pass federal laws to accomplish these things.

Tell me one application where the CFL cost outweighs the incandescent bulb. Maybe you didn't read my earlier post about our condo association changing over to CFL's in the early nineties. That "experiment" prompted all the other condo associations and the master association in that development to convert to CFL's. I've since left the area but a friend of mine says they are still using CFL's. When the cost comes down I think the halogen bulbs might take over the CFL's. The life cycle is much longer.

 

[ERD50]

Tell me one application where the CFL cost outweighs the incandescent bulb.

A closet light.

That's one. I can do many more:

Stair lights. Attic lights. Lights in rooms we seldom use. Bulbs in fixtures in rooms that we use a lot, but use other lights mainly.

Want more?

Fixtures that would need to be replaced to take the CFL. Big cost there.

Lights that I have on dimmers, because I want the variable light output. Those would require expensive dim-able CFLs. Long, long payback on those.

Enough?


-ERD50

 

[eridanus]

I read that Germany looked into this same goal (and that 1M would obviously be a much higher % of their fleet), and they figured that if they achieved it, the carbon footprint of the country would be reduced by less than 1%. So they dropped it.

They haven't dropped it.

 

[samclem]

Tell me one application where the CFL cost outweighs the incandescent bulb.

ERD50 has given you some. I'll add my back porch light--I don't leave it on, I just use it for short periods. Moreover, when I flip the switch, I want to see what's out there right now. If it is -5 deg F outside, it's gonna be a long wait for that twist light to come to life.

CFL's use a lot more electricity than their rated wattage when they first come on. And short cycle times drastically reduce their life. This pro-CFL source claims that they live only 15% of their rated life if used at 5 minute cycle times, and that if electric costs are low they only have slightly lower overall costs than incandescent bulbs if left on for 5 minute stints. How well do you think they'll do in the one-minute intervals used in stair lamps? As I said in my earlier post--they are appropriate for some applications, not for all. I can figure this out for myself. Why is this a matter for Congress?

When the cost comes down I think the halogen bulbs might take over the CFL's. The life cycle is much longer.

The halogen lights are, and will remain, far less efficient than CFLs, and have many of the same problems (heat, short life) as the conventional tungsten incandescent bulb.

 

[Texas Proud]

A closet light.

That's one. I can do many more:

Stair lights. Attic lights. Lights in rooms we seldom use. Bulbs in fixtures in rooms that we use a lot, but use other lights mainly.

Want more?

Fixtures that would need to be replaced to take the CFL. Big cost there.

Lights that I have on dimmers, because I want the variable light output. Those would require expensive dim-able CFLs. Long, long payback on those.

Enough?


-ERD50

The one that I like to use the best is the half bath... my old house had 4 clear decorator lights... they were there when I bought the house in 1976 and still working when I sold it last year...

I have not had a CFL last anywhere near as long... true, the lights were only on a few minutes at a time, but they went through many many MANY cycles....

 

[BigNick]

I read somewhere that someone in Germany is selling incandescent light bulbs from China legally... as "small electric heaters".

I'm all in favour of saving energy and combating CO2, but I always thought that this ban combined minimal effect and maximum PITA value. For one thing, about 80% of bulb burn hours in most industrialised countries take place during months when the heating is on, so most of the heat helps keep your thermostat down (albeit less efficiently because generating electricity has already wasted some heat). As long as we're allowed to heat our homes with electricity (I don't know if anyone does this in the US, but it's reasonably common in Europe), it seems absurd to worry about 75W of lighting.

 

[SteveL]

Our electricity provider runs the juice on the grid a little hot; around 123.4Volts. When we first moved into the house 30 years ago, regular 115V bulbs lasted about 6 weeks. We then began buying 130V bulbs just to deal with the cost of buying bulbs. I have four 60W 130V floods in ceiling cans in the halls. These were installed in 1980. Typically, the 60W clear 130V incandescent bulbs in heavy use last as long as the CFLs, but cost a tiny fraction of CFL price. Still, we use CFL's in fixtures where the light is on a lot. I think it is still cheaper to use CFL's in that type of installation.

I have three lamps that use big bayonet base 100/200/300 3-way bulbs. Nothing else will fit. Don't know what we will do if they stop making them.

 

[JOHNNIE36]

a closet light.

That's one. I can do many more:

Stair lights. Attic lights. Lights in rooms we seldom use. Bulbs in fixtures in rooms that we use a lot, but use other lights mainly.

Want more?

Fixtures that would need to be replaced to take the cfl. Big cost there.

Lights that i have on dimmers, because i want the variable light output. Those would require expensive dim-able cfls. Long, long payback on those.

Enough?


-erd50

uncle!

 

[ERD50]

... I read that Germany looked into this same goal (and that 1M would obviously be a much higher % of their fleet), and they figured that if they achieved it, the carbon footprint of the country would be reduced by less than 1%. So they dropped it. ...

-ERD50

They haven't dropped it.

Ahh, apparently not. From what I recalled, the idea sounded so marginal, that I thought they had concluded to drop it, but I guess not.

I found another article about the study - it was worse than I thought - a 0.1% overall reduction in CO2 emissions country-wide, best-case (bold mine):

Study: Electric cars not as green as you think | Green Tech - CNET News

"What surprised us was that the carbon dioxide savings were so small," Viviane Raddatz, vehicle expert at WWF Germany, said in a phone interview from Berlin.

In a best-case scenario, the WWF assumes that the 1 million electric cars or plug-in vehicles would be running on renewable electricity and used at maximum mileage. Electric vehicles do not yet have the range of regular cars.

The carbon dioxide emission reductions from these 1 million electrical vehicles in Germany's transportation sector would be only 1 percent, according to the study, and overall national carbon dioxide emissions would only be cut by 0.1 percent. "That is not a very big deal," Raddatz said, adding that "it is not going to help us out of the transportation emission mess."

A worst-case scenario would be that the electric cars would run on electricity from coal instead of from renewable sources. ... An electric car with a lithium ion battery powered by electricity from an old coal power plant could emit more than 200g of carbon dioxide per km, compared with current average gasoline car of 160g of carbon dioxide per km in Europe, according to the study. The European Union goal for 2020 is 95g of carbon dioxide per km.

-ERD50

 

[harley]

Tell me one application where the CFL cost outweighs the incandescent bulb. Maybe you didn't read my earlier post about our condo association changing over to CFL's in the early nineties. That "experiment" prompted all the other condo associations and the master association in that development to convert to CFL's. I've since left the area but a friend of mine says they are still using CFL's. When the cost comes down I think the halogen bulbs might take over the CFL's. The life cycle is much longer.

I see you've been responded to regarding the various bulbs and usages, but even these answers miss this point. Where the hell does the federal gov't get off telling we the people what kind of light bulb to use? Suppose they decide you need to only eat 100% Bran cereal for breakfast. No eggs, no other cereals, no cold pizza. And they make it a law. Even IF there was science behind it, it's not their place to make these decisions. Aaarghhh!

 

[Rustic23]

+1

 

[Katsmeow]

Tell me one application where the CFL cost outweighs the incandescent bulb. Maybe you didn't read my earlier post about our condo association changing over to CFL's in the early nineties. That "experiment" prompted all the other condo associations and the master association in that development to convert to CFL's. I've since left the area but a friend of mine says they are still using CFL's.

FWIW I haven't had good luck with CFLs. We've bought name brands for years but have found they seem to burn out as fast as incandescent and cost much more....

When the cost comes down I think the halogen bulbs might take over the CFL's. The life cycle is much longer.

I used to think that but I've been researching lighting a bit lately (getting ready to build a house) and think that LED lights are probably the future. Costs are starting to come down. I'm not going to use them for our can lights in the new house, but will be using them for undercabinet lights in the kitchen.

 

[M Paquette]

I found another article about the study - it was worse than I thought - a 0.1% overall reduction in CO2 emissions country-wide, best-case

Nah. It'll be worst case. When the German folks are recharging those electric cars overnight, the power is going to be coming from their base-load generating plants, not their solar cells. And with the recent changes, I guarantee the base load plants won't be zero-carbon-emission facilities. It's coal, supplemented with Russian natural gas.

 

[JOHNNIE36]

I see you've been responded to regarding the various bulbs and usages, but even these answers miss this point. Where the hell does the federal gov't get off telling we the people what kind of light bulb to use? Suppose they decide you need to only eat 100% Bran cereal for breakfast. No eggs, no other cereals, no cold pizza. And they make it a law. Even IF there was science behind it, it's not their place to make these decisions. Aaarghhh!

I agree entirely that banning the incandescent bulb is way out of line. I think all bulbs should be available to the public. I support CFL's in so much as they save ME energy costs. Period.

 

[frank]

I think this whole scam is perpetrated by the manufacturers of the cfl bulbs. why sell bulbs for .25 apiece when you can sell them for 2.00 or 3.00 apiece? its all about the money. the cfl bulbs do not last any longer or burn any brighter than incandescent.

 

[HFWR]

I see you've been responded to regarding the various bulbs and usages, but even these answers miss this point. Where the hell does the federal gov't get off telling we the people what kind of light bulb to use? Suppose they decide you need to only eat 100% Bran cereal for breakfast. No eggs, no other cereals, no cold pizza. And they make it a law. Even IF there was science behind it, it's not their place to make these decisions. Aaarghhh!

Yeah! Let's get rid of all that pesky gumment regulation. Free markets! I miss dumping my used motor oil over the back fence. And those kids, they need to quit slacking at school, and get to work, say in a textile mill or coal mine.

And get off my lawn...

 

[Rustic23]

+1
In a free society the function of government should be to educate not legislate! Let me make the decision. If I want to dump motor oil on my property, it is my property! If it runs onto your property, sue me! There are lawyers waiting in line. If I want to be stupid and not wear my seat belt, or helmet, it is my right to be stupid! If what you believe is good then convince me, don't use governmental powers to make the world over in your eyes. You want to run a restaurant that caters to smokers, fine, I won't eat there. It's my choice. It's called FREEDOM!

 

[rescueme]

All this grumbling about a light source.

Heck, Abe Lincoln became president, and as I read somewhere he did his schoolwork by the light of a candle.

Spoiled brats ....

 

[Texas Proud]

I see you've been responded to regarding the various bulbs and usages, but even these answers miss this point. Where the hell does the federal gov't get off telling we the people what kind of light bulb to use? Suppose they decide you need to only eat 100% Bran cereal for breakfast. No eggs, no other cereals, no cold pizza. And they make it a law. Even IF there was science behind it, it's not their place to make these decisions. Aaarghhh!

Well, from earlier posts that I have read... and having NOT read the law... It seems to be that they passed a law that requires energy efficiency and NOT which bulb you can use... IOW, if they could make an incandescent bulb that met the law you could use it...

If this is true, then it is the manufactureres that have decided to go the CFL road...

If the law is written in such a way that there is no way to get incandescents working... then I would agree it is a backdoor way of getting CFLs....



On your breakfast example.... they DO limit what you can eat... the cereals have to meet a certain health level, so does your eggs and bacon... the laws are usually boundaries that can not be crossed, but you can do anything inside the boundaries....

 

[eridanus]

Well, from earlier posts that I have read... and having NOT read the law... It seems to be that they passed a law that requires energy efficiency and NOT which bulb you can use... IOW, if they could make an incandescent bulb that met the law you could use it...

If this is true, then it is the manufactureres that have decided to go the CFL road...

If the law is written in such a way that there is no way to get incandescents working... then I would agree it is a backdoor way of getting CFLs....



On your breakfast example.... they DO limit what you can eat... the cereals have to meet a certain health level, so does your eggs and bacon... the laws are usually boundaries that can not be crossed, but you can do anything inside the boundaries....

Yep, the law sets an efficiency minimum. If ya don't like it, invent a better incandescent.

This is another way of making the inefficient pay for their usage. More energy means more electric plants which means more taxes; more energy means more pollution. Since no man is an island, and we all live in communities, it seems completely fair for people to pay for their use.

 

[samclem]

It seems to be that they passed a law that requires energy efficiency and NOT which bulb you can use. . .

And by what authority, precisely, does the government get to mandate items like the energy efficiency of light bulbs? Or motor vehicles (CAFE standards)? Are consumers somehow being defrauded--it's too hard for the average Joe to look at the lumens and the watts and do the math? They can't figure out what "MPG" means?

If we think people are so stupid, is it really right to let them vote?