The EU ban the traditional incandescent bulb, formally bid farewell to "Edison Era"

[luminousled]

I read this news in a news site,in 4th September,now i share it with you.

On 1th September, the European Union don't allowed to import or produce the  traditional incandescent bulb,the ban came into effect, formally bid farewell to have lasted 100 years "Edison era." However, due to energy-saving bulbs(CFLs) brightness is worse than traditional bulbs,it's only a period of transition, in the future it will be replace by LED bulbs,residents began to accumulate the traditional Incandescent light bulb.

According to the ban, from September 1, 2009, the frosted light bulbs and more than 100 watt traditional bulbs will be banned, but the store's inventory can continue to sell; September 1, 2010 onwards, more than 75 watt traditional bulbs will be out of the market; September 1, 2011, more than 60 watt traditional light bulbs will be out of the market; to September 1, 2012, the traditional light bulb will be completely out of the market. However, the EU ban is not in the discussion between the EU Member States, and not did extensive solicitation of opinions in the European Parliament, it seem that the ban is impacted from the behind interest group.Recently,European countries have experienced buying a collection of traditional light bulbs phenomenon.

According to the EU regarding the investigations, using energy-saving lamps(CFLs) to replace the traditional light bulbs, 15 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions reduction each year. The energy consumption of traditional light bulbs, only less than 15% used for lighting, the rest turned into heat; energy-saving lamps 50% of the energy consumption used for lighting. According to expert estimates,there is 66 million household incandescent lamps in the Austrian, if one of 2 / 3 replaced by energy-saving lamps(CFLs), provincial electricity 380 million euros each year, to reduce carbon dioxide emissions of 1 million tons.

However, there are many people opposed to the traditional light bulbs out from the market. According to the polls of 1,000 Austrians survey by Institutions, 63.8% of people think that to replace the traditional light bulbs with energy-saving lamps "little significance", and only 4.8% of people will be replaced by the energy-saving light bulbs, there is 24% of people no energy-saving lamps at home.They do not use the energy-saving lamps.One reason is for a good light quality of traditional light bulbs, the energy-saving light is not such a soft light quality. Second, the energy-saving lamps(CFLs) contain toxic mercury, followed by the relative complexity of dealing with the problem. Third, the current energy-saving lamps(CFLs) is a transitional product, after a few years will be replaced by LED lighting technology.

[dnix71]

The US is supposed to ban "most" of them soon, too. But there are loopholes in the ban to allow specialty incandescent bulbs like bathroom vanity lights and halogen incandescents.

Personally, I think the US ought to ban CFLs, too, as soon as LED replacements with an edison base are available at a reasonable price. I would rather have the common incandescent than CFLs with mercury. But I don't see LEDs in some industrial settings because they can't take the heat that linear fluorescents or mercury/sodium vapor arc lamps thrive on.

-mods and posters- the subject line is too long for an "RE:"

[Volvo farmer]

Hmmm. I wonder how European baby chicks like this development? Every brooding pen I have ever seen in someone's back yard has been heated by an incandescent light bulb or two.

[TomW]

VF;

Yeah, that is one use I have need of them for. Not to mention running a low wattage bulb in the well pit when we get a week of -40F and 40 MPH winds.

Frankly, I want the friggin government out of the control business.

If folks would remove their cranium from their rectum we wouldn't need more "rules".

I can see it now, Americans going to Canada and Mexico buying toilets that use enough water to actually flush and heaters disguised as light sources, cigarettes that don't go out between drags and cheap medications. Enabling a whole new era of contraband criminals and the bigger prisons that will require.

Gotta love it!

Don't get me started ;=]

People pimping LED sales disguised as "news" should be banned from the internet, IMHO, but thats another rant.

Tom

[Electron Skipper]

Well, considering you would get a longer prison sentence for traficking 1 pound of illicit R-12 than you would a pound of Cocaine or heroin, social engineering reveals itself for what it is.

In the matter of lightbulbs, there is the law of unintended consequences.

Personally, I prefer the LED's over incandescent lighting for energy and quality of the light output in a number of applications. I cannot stand the CFL's for most applications.  However I am a realist in acknowledging the influences of the marketplace.  If people want to buy their CFL's because they think they are saving the planet, that is fine- but there are many who drive several miles to simply drop one off at a recycle event (I have seen this)- where is the energy saving there?  Then look at the energy used for manufacture and end use handling; with my example above omitted from that equation for the moment: there is far more energy involved in producing a CFL than there is  in producing an LED ampule with an Edison mazda base, and slightly less for the Incandescent.  

However, all that aside- if you look at the heat factor of incandescents- their heat is not wasted in areas where heating of a structure must be done for a major portion of the year, in other areas- it can be a factor.  Granted it is not a tremendous amount in most cases, but it can be a measurable amount when considering "average" use rates.

Thent here is the matter of extreme climates- try use a CFL at 0 degrees F- most will not work.  Expensive ballasts are required to get a standard florescent tube to operate down to -20 F.  Which leaves theincandescents and LEDs; many LEDs are good down to -40F/C get below that: that leaves incandescents and open flame.

Bottom line- let the market decide what technology a society chooses to use.  Only creating an artificial demand with governments banning things leads to higher costs for all.  Besides- when has any government been efficient at anything involving productivity?

If I were in Europe- I would be stocking up on the illicit bulbs to sell them on the black market when it arrives.  It could be rather profitable.

 

[DamonHD]

Hi,

1. The incandescents-as-useful-heating myth is almost always that, even in heating climates such as northern Europe.  The heat is usually delivered in the wrong place for a start.  And electric resistance heating is almost always a criminal waste of high-grade energy when there are alternatives such as heat pumps or the natural-gas grid for three times the heat for a given amount of CO2 emissions and often rather less money.  (I was talking to a UK government adviser today on when point-of-use resistance heating does make sense, but it still wouldn't involve incandescent bulbs!)  I can provide some URLs if you'd like me to back up my statement.
   
2. As I understand the EU ban, and I only live here (!), it is only against high-rated low-efficiency domestic non-speciality bulbs; so the one in your oven is still OK, and 40W ones are still OK, and high-efficiency halogens are still OK, and LEDs are fine if you can get/afford them and we all hope they'll be cheaper soon.  The ban is against <%5 efficient 100W bulbs in people's houses because they have been too selfish/indolent/idle/whatever to do it until now without the law forcing them to get their arse(s) into gear.
   
   

Rgds

Damon

[electrak]

  Incandescent lights as heat source, I have a 75 watt bulb in my chicken coup, when it burns out the water freezes up in the winter.  Should I get a heat pump for the coup?  Then I would still need a light source,

  Maybe we should just have everyone have a  LED headlamp, that way if they are not looking there, there is no light being wasted.  Or the government can implant it in our foreheads.

Government and dipers should be changed regually, for the same reason.

[Volvo farmer]

Hey now.

Maybe there is a industrial and economic need for chicken coop heat pumps. Now if you want a coup, well you know, we all want to change the world.

Does this appear very rude? I keep thinking that my comments are very rude. Why is that? Oh yeah! excuse me while I wipe this smile off my face. :-)

[Capt Slog]

As someone who has nothing else but CFL or LED lighting in the house, I've had quite a giggle at the whole "OMG-we're-all-going-to-die-from-lack-of-100w-bulbs" that has been going on in the uk for the last week or so.

There's been people panic buying bulbs! Talk of them buying what they consider to be lifetime's supply.

We changed as a household a few years back and haven't noticed any problems.  The light is plenty bright enough, and the colour isn't noticebly different; most of any colour cast can be mitigated by the shade used.  I know some take a while to warm up but even in that first 30secs, it's still bright enough to see by, you'd think it was pitch black listening to the press reports.

Apparently there was the same hue and cry a hundred years ago when incandescent light came in to replace gas.

.

[DamonHD]

Hey, Slog, I thought that were were already dead and gone 'down below': the Daily Fail and friends told us so and would NEVER whip up a scare story for nothing, would they?

Yes, we haven't had an incandescent in ages either at home.  I have mainly mains CFLs but also some mains and 12V LEDs...

Rgds

Damon

[Airstream]

I can see the IR bulbs used for poultry being used alongside CFLs to for simple comfort: lying down with a reflector lamp at ones' head to read a good book the warmth of an Edison bulb beating back Minnesota winter drafts to warm the back of your head (the only part of your body not covered in fleece or down) is NOT a waste of energy..

Or at the Bathroom vanity mirror for shaving or makeup, having the comfort of warmth AND light makes a frigid bathroom addition almost a pleasant experience.

What is the ruling on Quartz-Halogen bulbs? We have motion detector security lamps with those?

[luckeydog]

If the government can tell the people what light bulbs they can use ... then what else are they gonna start telling you what to do.

are they gonna ban whole milk and make it so you can only drink the 1% because they say it is bad for you.... OMG!! I am so sick of all the government control going on in the world.

 people who think it is good that government gets involved in every aspect of our lives, need a brain transplant.

  Luckeydog

[DamonHD]

That's one view of how best to organise "civilisation".  B^>

Rgds

Damon

[DamonHD]

So far as I know (but I don't know the detail, though I understand the aims) they are currently OK in the UK/EU: the aim is to drive up lumens/Watt for lighting, though no one is stopping anyone buying resistive heating too if you really want it.

And again I don't know, but I imagine that IR/heat lamps eg for food warming/display applications will be OK, when the heat application is on the tin as it were.

Use one of those in the chicken run and they'd be finger-linking good.  %-P

Rgds

Damon

[electrak]

people who think it is good that government gets involved in every aspect of our lives, need a brain transplant.

They already had one, the government did it, they got one from Abbi, Abbi Normal.

[SparWeb]

Sorry Tom,

The meddlers have been at work up here, too.  The incandescents are on the way out in many provinces, and the toilets flush a thimbleful, too.  Pretty soon all of the corn crop will be biofuel for the car, and I won't be allowed to eat red meat (mad cow disease).  Then I'll only sh** a thimbleful, so the toilet thing will solve itself.

[TomW]

Steven;

Yeah, I hear you!

Maybe they actually have a valid agenda? NOT!

Another good reason to get as far removed from the mainstream as possible.

Tom

[frepdx]

Electrak, I can usually agree with your statement - but there are exceptions. In the early 70's California imposed emission standards for automobiles. Detroit went ballistic and claimed it couldn't be done. The auto companies said they'd go bankrupt because of the impossible technical requirements put forth by those crazy Californian environmentalists politicians. But guess what happened ... a few years down the road we all had cleaner cars, and for the most part people are happy with the change.

I see energy efficiency in the same light. There should be a 'stupidity' tax placed on common incandescents for which economical high efficiency alternatives exists. I've used CFL's for almost twenty years and they were horrible at first. Nowadays they are pretty good. I get high quality halogens for my kids desk lamps, the best I can find, but pretty much everything else is high efficiency. The light quality and color and lack of flicker make these bulbs better than the common incandescent, at least in my opinion, and they save money.

[Ungrounded Lightning Rod]

Lying down with a reflector lamp at ones' head to read a good book the warmth of an Edison bulb beating back Minnesota winter drafts to warm the back of your head (the only part of your body not covered in fleece or down) is NOT a waste of energy..

And switching to LED Christmas Tree lighting will likely cause some homeless in Alaska to freeze to death.  (They figured out that if they take a string of incandescant bulbs off a municipal tree decoration and warp it around themselves they get enough heat to survive the night.  Thus were born the "Christmas Bums".)

= = = =

One thing that gripes me about the replacements is that they tout each size as replacing a particular wattage bulb when in fact the light output is invariably less.  Some fool apparently thought that by going smaller they could save more energy - and thus they get the consumers to think the replacements are substandard and inadequate, impeding migration.

This was annoying with the CFLs, where they at least TOLD you how much dimmer they were - and it was enough to be just annoying.  But I'm really tweaked with Lights of America.  They sold me a LED light assembly ("bulb") they claim "replaces a 40 watt bulb" and consumes only 5% of the power - but don't list lumen output.

At first I thought that commercial LED assemblies beating CFLs by a good margin (i.e. more than CFLs beat incandescents) had arrived a couple years early.  And I REALLY wanted to replace the lamp that lights the mandated house numbers on my porch.  So I got one and installed it.  And you couldn't see the numbers from halfway to the street.  With a 25W incandescent you can see them from the street.  So the LED "40 Watt replacement" was putting out less than a quarter the light of a 25W incandescent.  Oops!

Their web site doesn't give lumens either.  And email asking for it got an evasive reply.  Sounds to me like they know they're doing some major false advertising.  (And are giving LEDs an even worse name than CFLs.  B-(  )

= = = =

And as for potties:  The low-flush toilets don't run enough water to clear the solids from the plumbing.  We've had to have the rooter companies over - and install a two-way cleanout at about five grand in addition to repairing roof damage when the try through the vent didn't work - when it turned out to be clogged beyond our own ability to snake it.  We now flush twice - once for us, once for Al Gore.  And if we install the newer, lower, model in the next remodel we'll have to flush three times.

(What's a double bummer about that is his campaign photo shoot in the boat rah-rahing his work to help mother nature, where the river was too low so his staffer had the operator of the dam upstream open the spillway to raise the water lever - and dumped several times more fresh water than all the low-flush toilets his law mandated had saved to date.)

As for wasting resources:  We had to turn up the well pressure to 60 psi (from the original 30) to get adequate water pressure to run the government mandated "low-flow" showerhead.  That's the equivalent of pumping every drop of our well water up an extra 69+ feet - with fuel-generated grid power.  B-(  (I've been meaning to drill out the restrictor so I can turn the pressure back down.  But it's integrated into the hose fitting - no doubt to prevent such activity - and I don't want to do that until I have a spare in case I break something.)

[Ungrounded Lightning Rod]

And meanwhile they cost an arm and a leg extra.  And the engine compartment ended up buried in hoses and vacuum actuators and thermal valves - the failure of any of which would wreck the gains - if not the engine.  Even now they STILL get worse gas mileage than the older muscle cars unless they're essentially powered roller-skates with wrap-around windbreaks.

And I ought to know:  Much of my early career was doing engine control and emission testing software for those auto companies.

What finally made this all practical is the engine computer, which made each calculation part of a line of code rather than a set of machined moving parts.  Once you've got that you can tune the hell out of the engine.  And that would have come along anyhow - because it saves money building the engine.

[zeusmorg]

 I guess I'm going to have to add my 2c worth here.

 We've already figured out that incandescents in certain applications have their place, one of them being photography, since they are much more stable in their degrees kelvin than any other light source. They can also be used for supplemental heat, but if light isn't needed a nichrome heater could easily be substituted and probably at a lower wattage. There are currently many specialty bulbs on the market that are incandescent, not traditional edison screw in fixtures, what are going to happen to the people that have these lamps?

 Here in the U.S. the "ban" on incandescents is supposed to occur in 2010, yet I still see MOST fixtures sold for lighting set up for conventional bulbs. Curious, hmm?

 I personally get PEEVED as hell when the government tries to tell me how to run my life, can't smoke in public places, nor drink, even if you're not driving. The city I live in even tried to stop trans-fat from being used in any restaurants! Come on, If you don't know by now that doughnuts are bad for you..........(this part could go on for lines)

I've still yet to figure out how second hand smoke outside is more deadly than a car's exhaust.

 I use almost exclusively fluorescent lighting,except in applications where it's not warranted, and I've done so for years, not just recently when the CFL bulbs came out, although i did replace my few edison bulbs with them,,mainly. However that was a PERSONAL economic decision, not something shoved down my throat..(I even have an oil lamp).

[Volvo farmer]

(I even have an oil lamp).

You got a carbon credit stamp for that lamp there fella? :-)

[zeusmorg]

 I use it for "space heating" so it's ok....

[joestue]

Pure FUD.

So what you are saying is fsk all the math and research, my xx%* reduction in mercury emissions ending up directly in land fills is more dangerous than that mercury ending up in my air.

Go ahead and ignore the reduction in GWh results in a net benefit spread across the rest of the system, and will allow the existing power plants to reduce growth for another 2-4 years.

Or perhaps you are ignoring the fact that due to the media hype manufactures have reduced mercury content across the board below the 5mg threshold that grabbed everyones attention.

TCP Inc. for instance said part of their product line was below 2mg in 2007, Osram Sylvania should be below 2.5 mg as of last year.

Perhaps you think the semiconductor industry is less polluting than the coal industry? Gallium Arsenide...? We don't even have a reality check on that as most of the silicon is produced in third world countries.

*note: Numbers are misleading and often deliberately false, one report said only 7% decrease in total mercury emission, based off EPA mercury emissions of 48 tons in 1999 divided by energy saved. Another [wikipedia] says CFL is ~60%, or about 40% less than the Edison counter part. if you exclude non coal power generated, its a 60-70 percent reduction in mercury.

What we don't know is the mercury emission of the plants in China/India producing the bulb.

It may be the same as whats in the bulb. More importantly however, it doesn't pollute the air and therefore in the US at least, it would be possible to completely contain.

On a positive note, at least we aren't still using mercury turbines.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,777629-1,00.html

[dnix71]

It would be better to go with waterless toilets than the super low flow stuff if water is that short supply. The existing sanitary drain would receive urine and water used to clean the bowl.

http://www.thenaturalhome.com/compost.html

At least that way the solids don't clog the pipes. My "low flow water" toilet flushes 1.6 gallons per. The new ones are down to 1 gallon a flush. When I bought mine there were 2 models, one for $40 and one for $80. I asked the Home Depot clerk what the difference was and he said the $80 toilet was made well enough to actually flush correctly. I took him at his word and so far I've had no trouble.

[frepdx]

Everything you say might be true, but I'm not sure I see your point. Would you like to see emission standards rolled back? Do you really thing the automotive industry would be making cars as clean as they are without these standards? Would they have done it in as timely a fashion? Personally, I don't think so.

[bj]

   Sorry Tom, but our Canadian cigarettes go out an average of three times

per, unless you puff like a fool.  Yes I have kept track.  One of my favorite rants.

bj

[scottsAI]

Frepdx,

I will take you up on that.

Yes, once a law has accomplished its purpose it should be removed.

Yet, they keep adding laws.

I totally believe if competition were allowed FREE rein, we would have better vehicles today.

More harm than good was done by the emission laws, over all.

Early emission vehicles were a POS, the pathetic Mustang II, was an embarrassment.

CA had a smog problem which existed before the cities were built. Yet we all paid the price for their idea of a fix. Vehicles use less than 30% of the total energy, Homes use MORE, yet all the laws were focused on vehicles? Why?

If lower emission vehicles were cheaper, people would buy them. Detroit would fall all over themselves to supply them. Look at higher mpg today. GM is scrambling to supply them because that is what the market wants, but was not what people were buying recently. Thus GM did not make them.

DeLorean taught us an important lesson. If safety sells then the DeLorean should have sold like hot cakes, the safest vehicle built for the time and then some. He went out of business. Yet if the vehicle were the cheapest people would have bought them.

We claim we believe in free enterprise, yet people are more than willing to shove their personal beliefs down my throat. The environmentalist theory's are BS. When the weather man can predict next decades weather accurately I may believe they know what their taking about. Today we are lucky to get 3 days. Often 3 hours is pushing it.

Do we believe in free enterprise? If so then tax what you don't want the people to use. They will of their own free will change to the lower cost method. NO laws, to threats. People are cheap. Yep a few will keep doing things the way they were, just like when you pass laws.

God gave us ONE book to live a proper life.

Whole Law libraries are devoted to the laws of man, we are legally responsible for ALL the laws, yet for some reason I must go to different lawyers for each specialty because the laws are tooo complex for one man to comprehend.

Don't want people to use incandescent lamps? Tax them so they cost more. I (people) will stop using them, the law basically goes away after the market for the incandescent lamps dries up.

Have fun,

Scott.

[Ungrounded Lightning Rod]

CFLs go in the "medium base" or "candelabra base" sockets for conventional bulbs.

So do LED arrays.

And, at least in my city, the anti-incandescent zoning law mandates a fluorescent fixture that won't take an incandescent bulb - or an LED array.

[Ungrounded Lightning Rod]

DeLorean didn't fail because the people didn't want the car.  It was doing fine.

It failed because the government busted DeLorean on an apparently bogus cocaine smuggling charge while he was busy raising ramp-up money - and by the time he got that dealt with and got back to trying to get his business running again he found somebody had pulled the dies out of the presses and thrown them into a nearby lake, destroying them.

He'd have had to raise enough MORE money to essentially restart from zero, with no guarantee that it wouldn't happen again and TWO sets of investors to split any profits.  B-b

[electrak]

There are exceptions to everyting.

 With emission standards the government said lower emissions how ever you can, and every car company did it a bit differently, as to having cleaner cars,? what is cleaner a Pick-Up (1980 W200) that gets 18mpg(225cu) but fails the smog test by 25% over or the same truck that gets 8 mpg(360cu) and passes? two different engines same truck same usage.

 Define stupidity? is using a incandescent and turning it on only when you need it worse then using a CFL all evening even if you are not in the room? People do this,

[DamonHD]

I don't think that anyone has suggested that you should leave your CFLs on with no one in the room.

Conservation and efficiency are needed, or all the effort is just pissed away.

Rgds

Damon

[frepdx]

One thing that I don't understand and bugs me ... White led lights usually have poor color rendition, they are getting better but still suck for the most part. With packaged led arrays why don't the manufacturers throw in a few different color leds to fill out the spectrum? I can see with single led lights it makes sense to concentrate on the phosphor, but with multi-led arrays it seems like a no-brainer, and, if I'm not mistaken, non-phosphor leds are more efficient.