60W bulb outlawed tomorrow in Europe

Problem is we're all out of carrot. There have been several tax incentives for efficiency here. On the CFL front, there was a time when power companies were literally giving them away.

That's not to say I don't prefer carrots, but they have their limits. Sometimes a stick is just necessary, as it was with leaded gasoline. Doing nothing really isn't an option here, and it's nothing to do with climate change. It's estimated that the rule will save the equivalent of 30 power plants in the US.

This particular stick is also expected to save billions of dollars ($12b/yr in the US, €5-10b/yr in the EU). Any kind of carrot would not save as much (and would probably have some kind of cost, at least to taxpayers), and would make a smaller dent in the problem.

But how is imposing a requirement on every business not 'in your face' government?

 

Another example of how we're falling behind the rest of the world in environmental matters--thanks to special interests.

 

Would anyone have been happier if there was a $40 per bulb tax of light bulbs that did not meet efficiency guidelines? Instead of banning them?

 

I doubt it's my house, (17 yrs old), and never had problems with other lighting fixtures.

I purchased these CFL's (case lot), at a local home show at a very low price about 4 years ago. I believe these are Phillips, but manufactured in China, (where else?)

Interestingly, I've used these CFL's in my outdoor lighting fixtures and they're still going strong. It was just the interior ones that failed.

 

Hopefully there's a bit of consolation to the mercury fear in CFL'S. Newer versions that have come out over the last 4 to 5 years have really cut back on mercury use.

 

Thanks, John!

I bought these from Home Depot. Two of the bigger ones to replace the ceiling lights in the kitchen, and they are a big improvement in both the amount and the quality of light, in addition to all the advantages of LEDs regarding lifetime and energy use. And 4 of the smaller ones to replace regular bulbs.

Oddly, the smaller bulb, drawing one watt less power, puts out more lumens, maybe because it's a "daylight" color temperature while the other is a soft white temperature.

Now I need to decide if I want to replace the CFLs in my house (and do what with them?) or wait for them to die.

 

Unless you have reasons other than energy usage, keep the CFLs until they die then replace them. You local hazardous waste place should take them off your hands.

 

Conservation and efficiency are key to no longer substituting oil for knowledge. We can now apply the knowledge and live more economically and transition toward more cost effective lighting, heating, cooling, etc. The transition is to LEDs (light emitting diodes), not CFLs.

 

Decent question. The key answer revolves around whether the requirements allow any viable solution or work just by outlawing technologies. It also depends on if you want to consider a business as deserving all the rights of a human being.

Building codes for fire prevention, earthquake and hurricane resistance, electrical safety, etc. are not considered "technology elimination" requirements, but as essential standards necessary for a high standard of living. They primarily work by setting standards, not eliminating technologies. No reason that energy efficiency cannot be handled the same way.

Now consider that instead of hurricane wind standards, we outlawed all building materials except just cinder block. Instead of electrical safety codes, we outlawed all outlets except child proof GFI outlets. Instead of earthquake standards we outlawed all non-floating foundation buildings. As you can see, just eliminating stuff does not get us to the end goal.

 

Or carry them back to Home Depot when they burn out and you need to buy the LED to replace it. HD has recycle bins for the CFL bulbs - right by the exit at my local one.

I agree with the keeping the CFL until they burn out. The energy savings from CFL to LED is so small, that you may as well hold out until that time. That's my plan currently, unless I add/change existing lighting fixtures that my current CFL bulb supply doesn't make sense to use.

 

Thanks for that info. My local waste disposal site is so good at accepting hazardous waste for free that I usually just make an annual trip to it. I like the idea of getting rid of the bulbs at HD before they get broken waiting for my annual trip.

 

LED offers another reason often overlooked: resistance to vibration. They really shine (bad pun) when used ceiling fans.
.

 

But if this were done with lighting, I bet that you'd still complain about how the standards are set.

Oh wait! We already had this discussion, back in posts #37 and 38!

BTW, these standards do not flunk all incandescents, only an inefficient form of it. A more modern and efficient variety, halogens, can still pass the standard.

 

You actually have me there. I'll also bet that if I change my viewpoint to "the government rules are unquestionably brilliant" I'd get a lot more responses than I've gotten so far.

 

GrumpyCabbie: Are halogen bulbs like this available in the UK?



I ask because I was reading a BBC story about the upcoming ban and everyone was complaining about compact florescent lamps. The major complaints seem to be light quality, dimmability, and mercury.

We have had the same discussions going on here in the US with the same complaints about CFL's. It seems that people that hate the idea of the ban think that the only other option is a CFL.

BTW the bulb is a 43W Halogen (incandescent) bulb that puts out 786 lumens. It is dimmable, fits our standard socket, contains no mercury, and is made in the US.

The US ban doesn't effect me in the slightest. We changed to CFL's in 2001. At the time the GE bulbs were $20 each so we purchased one per paycheck. Those bulbs moved to our next house and most were still working when we moved again in 2007. (The woman that bought our house included in her offer the stipulation that the CFL's had to stay!) We did have some problems with some "Lights of America" bulbs we purchased in bulk from Sam's Club. About 30% of the bulbs burned out with a couple hours of use.

 

I was just curious if you had something similar available. Like I said, the comments on the BBC article made no mention of them and seem to indicate that CFL's were the only legal alternative. I missed your comment about the 40w halogen.

I find a 30% reduction in energy use to be massive especially when all it requires is replacing a bulb. Yes, halogens are near the minimum legal limit but anytime you have a limit someone will make a product that meets the bare minimum. In the US we have all sorts of required minimum efficiency standards the public just doesn't know about them. Appliances like refrigerators, dishwasher, etc get more efficient as new standards phase in. Light bulbs are different because consumers see a product disappearing from the shelf.

I just replaced my house heat pump. The unit installed by the builder 15 years ago was a 10 SEER. When I talked to the HVAC installer, the minimum allowed now is 13 SEER. I chose to install a 16.5 SEER unit because a federal tax credit paid for the difference in price. The new unit is 33% more efficient than the old and I can really see the difference in my utility bill. What shocked me is that the installer said he had only installed 2 units all year that where more efficient then 13 SEER. People were choosing to go with the bare minimum allowed by law even when someone else would pay the difference in purchase price!

 

They are but aren't widely promoted. All the push and hype is about CFLs.
They have even been giving CFLs away in various promotions.

The kind of range we can get in halogen replacement bulbs...
Energy Saving Halogen Light Bulbs

 

Full story: Behold, the $15 LED bulb | MNN - Mother Nature Network

Tom

 

The price of the 60W has dropped to $24.97

And the new 75W is now available for $39.97
.