Light bulb insanity

[Ralph Sprang]

This coincides with the outlawing of incandescent bulbs at the first of the year.

There is no "outlawing of incandescent bulbs" - that is a myth perpetrated by the media mis-representing the bill. Note that the media says "banning traditional incandescent bulbs" - which is technically true - while people interpret that as banning incandescent bulbs - which is not true.

They do have to meet higher efficiency standards, but several manufacturers are already producing compliant bulbs.

It's likely over the next five to ten years incandescents will decline and disappear, due to declining demand, but they will still be legal to make and sell.

Here is a link to the law: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-11...110publ140.htm

which shows this table:

``GENERAL SERVICE INCANDESCENT LAMPS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Rate Minimum Rate Effective
Rated Lumen Ranges Wattage Lifetime Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1490-2600 72 1,000 hrs 1/1/2012
1050-1489 53 1,000 hrs 1/1/2013
750-1049 43 1,000 hrs 1/1/2014
310-749 29 1,000 hrs 1/1/2014
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bulbs in all common wattages that meet the new efficiency standards are currently available at the box stores and will continue to be sold. The average consumer will see no change in availability of incandescent bulbs, just more efficient bulbs at around the same price.

[Brian Elfert]

Bulbs in all common wattages that meet the new efficiency standards are currently available at the box stores and will continue to be sold. The average consumer will see no change in availability of incandescent bulbs, just more efficient bulbs at around the same price.

You're technically correct that government did not ban traditional incandescent light bulbs, however they effectively banned them by increasing lighting efficiency standards that traditional incandescent light bulbs cannot meet.

Where does one find a traditional incandescent light bulb that meets the new efficiency standards without utilizing a loophole like rough service? There are halogen light bulbs now available in the traditional A19 shape, but I don't consider these a normal incandescent light bulb.

[Ralph Sprang]

Where does one find a traditional incandescent light bulb that meets the new efficiency standards without utilizing a loophole like rough service?

They have been available at the box stores for several months. Around here, they closed out the "traditional" incandescents in early 2013 and only the "legal" ones have been available most of the year. The incandescents people have been hoarding are likely the ones that will continue to available - they look about the same as the old ones.

The better question, though, is why would one want to buy incandescents? CFLs and LEDs are more energy efficient, can produce the same color of light as incandescents, and generate less waste heat. In spite of all the hysteria about mercury in CFLs, they still have less mercury than a fluorescent tube, thermometer, or most incandescent bulbs. With the utility incentives making them essentially free, CFLs are the way to go until LEDs become essentially free.

[Dan Hintz]

The better question, though, is why would one want to buy incandescents?

When someone makes an LED bulb that can withstand the heat in my oven, then I'll switch away from incandescents completely.

[Roy Harding]

...
The better question, though, is why would one want to buy incandescents? ...

Although I gradually switched over to CFLs (over a few years, as the lights needed replacing), I still use incandescents in my oven, in my fridge and freezer, and in my exterior fixtures. Of course - I live in Northern Canada - where CFLs take a LONG time to throw any useful light when it's 40 below. A motion sensor exterior light which takes five minutes to throw light doesn't do you much good when approaching a doorway.

[Charles Coolidge]

You guys are full of good news. I was just looking at the dimmer switch operated recessed incandescents in my office that are less than a year old, and it drove home the point of how utterly misguided this law is. How is it a good idea to in essence force obsolescence of a functioning product, so that the consumer then has to spend more money on a worse product? Wait, I think there is a pattern there....

I have less available money to pay for my energy, because I also have to upgrade hardware, so it makes my effective cost of energy higher. It's another way that the energy saved by the green bulbs is a false economy. I'm suspicious that the breakeven on these new bulbs is longer than most of us will live now.

You have to use a government approved 'green' calculator for it to make sense. Much the same logic of government forcing mileage killing pollution controls on diesels so now you have to burn 20% more diesel to go the same distance...wait how is burning more fuel producing less pollution?

[Ralph Sprang]

When someone makes an LED bulb that can withstand the heat in my oven, then I'll switch away from incandescents completely.

That is a good point - there are still applications where commercially available LEDs and CFLs may not perform well - like your oven.

Is your oven lamp really in the oven, though? On my oven, the lamp is outside the insulation of the oven and only gets to 100 F or so, well within the range of LEDs.

Interesting question, though, whether incandescents can withstand higher temperatures than LEDs.

[Ralph Sprang]

Of course - I live in Northern Canada - where CFLs take a LONG time to throw any useful light when it's 40 below. A motion sensor exterior light which takes five minutes to throw light doesn't do you much good when approaching a doorway.

Is that for older CFLs, or do the newer "instant on" CFLs also take a while to achieve full brightness at those temperatures?

[Dan Hintz]

Is your oven lamp really in the oven, though? On my oven, the lamp is outside the insulation of the oven and only gets to 100 F or so, well within the range of LEDs.

Light from the bulb needs to pass through to the heat chamber, which means at some point the bulb has to be open to heat soak. In all ovens I've seen, this is done through a glass/quartz window. No matter how much you insulate the light well, the heat within it will eventually rise to the heat chamber's temp, so easily 500F+.

Interesting question, though, whether incandescents can withstand higher temperatures than LEDs.

There's no question, they can. An incandescent works off of the principle of heating a filament until it's hot enough to glow in the visible spectrum... by its very nature it is designed to get hot.

[Matt Meiser]

Although I gradually switched over to CFLs (over a few years, as the lights needed replacing), I still use incandescents in my oven, in my fridge and freezer, and in my exterior fixtures. Of course - I live in Northern Canada - where CFLs take a LONG time to throw any useful light when it's 40 below. A motion sensor exterior light which takes five minutes to throw light doesn't do you much good when approaching a doorway.

Try LEDs. Our dusk-dawn post light out front uses 3 candelabra base bulbs. Incandescent would last about 6 months. CFL's a maybe a year. The LEDs, from Costco, have been in there a couple years now. The incandescent used a total of around 75W...LED, something like 8W. I've got a purpose-made motion light that uses LEDs on the back of my shop that's great too. I'll convert the others to LED bulbs as they go out. We did LED under cabinet lighting in our kitchen too and I'm really happy with the result. The LED bulb I bought for over the sink went back thought--it hummed and threw weird shadows on the translucent shade.

[Ralph Sprang]

No matter how much you insulate the light well, the heat within it will eventually rise to the heat chamber's temp, so easily 500F+.

...
An incandescent works off of the principle of heating a filament until it's hot enough to glow in the visible spectrum... by its very nature it is designed to get hot.

The bulb compartment is well insulated and does not rise to the heat chamber's temp, in my experience and measurement. If it did, I expect the glass bulb on an incandescent would rupture due to the high temperature. That's one reason for using quartz as "glass" in ovens.

FWIW, LEDs are used in industrial heat chambers. We heat and cool through a range of -200F to 800F or so. The bulb enclosures are well insulated and don't exceed the industrial temp range, so really any bulb - incandescent, LED, or CFL - that meets industrial temp range (-40C to +85C) is fine.

Home ovens are likely not as well insulated, but also cover a lower temperature range and can be insulated to keep the bulb in the commercial temp range (0C - 70C).

[Brian Elfert]

Appliance bulbs, rough service bulbs, yellow bug bulbs, colored bulbs, among others are all exempt from the light bulb ban. You'll still be able to get an incandescent bulb for your oven.

[Roy Harding]

Try LEDs. Our dusk-dawn post light out front uses 3 candelabra base bulbs. Incandescent would last about 6 months. CFL's a maybe a year. The LEDs, from Costco, have been in there a couple years now. The incandescent used a total of around 75W...LED, something like 8W. I've got a purpose-made motion light that uses LEDs on the back of my shop that's great too. I'll convert the others to LED bulbs as they go out. We did LED under cabinet lighting in our kitchen too and I'm really happy with the result. The LED bulb I bought for over the sink went back thought--it hummed and threw weird shadows on the translucent shade.

Thanks for that - I'll give the LEDs a whirl when the incandescents give out. I haven't tried the LEDs yet.

[PeterTorresani]

[QUOTE=Mike Henderson;2193493]I don't know of any reliable evidence that demonstrates that human activity has has little or no effect on climate.

I won't argue global warming or climate change here (wrong forum), but if you don't know of any reliable evidence that human activity has little to no effect on climate, then you are not looking for it. There is "evidence" for both sides of the argument, and even more theories. Regardless of your belief, if you don't take the time to understand the other side of an argument, then you have nothing but blind belief.

Your link was interesting. Every time I see it used, I remember Dr. James Hanson who testified to congress on the extreme consequences of GW. Years later he testified again and admitted that he exaggerated the potential in order to increase awareness of the problem. A cynic might say he lied in order to increase the funding for his department.

[Mike Henderson]

I won't argue global warming or climate change here (wrong forum), but if you don't know of any reliable evidence that human activity has little to no effect on climate, then you are not looking for it. There is "evidence" for both sides of the argument, and even more theories. Regardless of your belief, if you don't take the time to understand the other side of an argument, then you have nothing but blind belief.

Since it's so readily available, perhaps you could post some links to it. The difficult hurdle you have to overcome is to show that the vast majority of climate scientists are wrong. If the scientists who believe there's no correlation between human activity and climate change can't convince their peers, I have to look askance at their claims.

Mike