incandescent bulbs

[lighthouse]

@Irishman

Seems like the brighter ones are more efficient, and thus should be the later ones banned, if anything.

Well, there you are…
it actually makes some marketed regular type 100W bulbs legal
(and not just for being exempted category like “rough service” )

US Regulation Absurdity: Dim 100W bulbs allowed, Bright 100W bulbs banned!

[constanze]

@Irishman

That doesn’t explain why they are banned at different times. What distinguishes them for the purposes of banning?

Seems like the brighter ones are more efficient, and thus should be the later ones banned, if anything.

Um, who said that? The criterion for stopping further production is inefficiency which equates to old-style incandescent bulbs, with a graduated time plan (at least in the countries I know off) to phase them out gradually: on Jan. 1st, the 25 W bulbs are no longer produced, on April 1st the 40 W stops, on Sept. 1st the 60W bulbs stop, etc. until you reach 100W.

You can keep buying a much brighter Halogen or CFL bulb with less wattage but greater brightness (again, as measured in lumen and in subjective colour).

For some people, just switching from the yellowish light of incandescent to the blueish of normal CFLs with the same lumen feels much brighter and clearer and better for reading or doing work.

In other cases, a higher lumen is available for lower wattage, like replacing a 75W with 60W halogen = 90W equivalent, or a 30W CFL = 100 W equivalent, thus saving energy.

[constanze]

@Doug_K

We tried CFs for about a year. Biggest mistake we ever made. The cost difference was huge – 7-8 dollars each compared to $1.50-2.00 for a 4 pack of incandescents. And the lifespan? At BEST slightly less than incandescents. On average about half as long. The only way they could have been cheaper in the long run would have been if our electric bill had been reduced to zero, and maybe not even then.

I have since found out that they don’t do well in recessed or enclosed fixtures. Well, that pretty much just leaves the laundry room.

It’s strange how these anecdotes always only happen to those people who are already ideologically opposed to the technology, and not to those who accept it.

Sure, when we started buying CFLs 20 years back, a friend of mine living in an old house with weak wiring had to wait longer till they gave full light than the new generation. Sure, in some areas where the power fluctuates a lot, they burn out a bit quicker. But a lifespan of “slightly less than incandescents, on average half as long”? You must have some really weird wiring or power problems in your house.

[av8rmike]

@constanze

What kind of vision problems prevent CFL usage?

I’m not an ophthalmologist, so I can’t speak to specifics, but she has some vision impairment due to Multiple Sclerosis. When we’re in a room lit by CFLs, she talks about having difficulty focusing and disorientation. Every time these stories come out about “incandescents are going to be banned”, whether true or not, she worries about not being able to function in our own home.

[Doug_K]

@constanze

It’s strange how these anecdotes always only happen to those people who are already ideologically opposed to the technology, and not to those who accept it.

Where do you get this? I tried them as long as I did because I was emphatically in favor of them. The first time several of them went out I counted it as a fluke and replaced them all. And the second time, and the third time. It was only after a year that I was dragged kicking and screaming to the realization that they just don’t perform as advertised and went back to incandescents.

[constanze]

@leggy

Most consumers don’t read the lumen values, they read the “equivalent” values. They know what a 100W bulb looks like, but they don’t know how many lumens it puts out.

Well I don’t assume that consumers are idiots unable to read.

Plus, as I stated before, these bulbs get much dimmer over time, losing 50% of their efficiency by the time the “die.”

And just like last time you made that statement, I would like a cite for that. You can keep stating things like that, but that doesn’t make them true.

Low CRI lights, such as CFL’s, output light that is 15% or more “wrong.” There are weird peaks and valleys in the output. Colors look off. Your mind perceives something is weird, but you can’t quite figure it out. It’s unsettling.

The only high-CRI fluorescents are the big tube lights. CFL’s are pretty bad.

“White” LED’s are even worse. They’re great for flashlights, but awful for room lighting.

Color management is one of my skills as a professional photographer. I know a lot more about light than the average person.

If you are indeed as you claim a photographer, yet you are so sensitive to those “peaks and valleys” in the output of CFLs, I wonder how you can do your job outside your studio at all. Or maybe you don’t leave your studio. Because I’ve never heard from normal people anything about light from CFLs being “weird” or unsettling.

The one constant comment is that the light is more blueish compared to the yellowish old bulbs. For those people who are bothered by it, the new and newest generation of CFL offer warmer colours and even full-spectrum colour. These special colours do cost more, because they require more effort when producing and are less in demand.

[constanze]

@av8rmike

I’m not an ophthalmologist, so I can’t speak to specifics, but she has some vision impairment due to Multiple Sclerosis. When we’re in a room lit by CFLs, she talks about having difficulty focusing and disorientation. Every time these stories come out about “incandescents are going to be banned”, whether true or not, she worries about not being able to function in our own home.

So she reacts to neon lights in the same fashion? Then it’s probably a question of her reacting to some frequency modulation that most people don’t notice.
Has she looked (in a lamp store) at full-spectrum CFLs? Then it could be a case of the blueish light bothering her (a few people react that way).

And you do know that halogen bulbs aren’t “banned”, right?

Has she tried LED bulbs (looking at them in the lamp store), which are going to replace CFLs in the long run? Are those okay?

[av8rmike]

@constanze

Has she looked (in a lamp store) at full-spectrum CFLs? Then it could be a case of the blueish light bothering her (a few people react that way).

And you do know that halogen bulbs aren’t “banned”, right?

Has she tried LED bulbs (looking at them in the lamp store), which are going to replace CFLs in the long run? Are those okay?

I know most of these things aren’t “banned”, I was strictly using hyperbole. And I’ve suggested a couple of options as far as different-color-temperature CFLs or LED bulbs but been met with “I don’t like those things/I can’t see properly with them/Why are you still talking about this?” She’s all for reducing energy usage and being environmental, but not at the expense of being able to function. Until it does become truly impossible to obtain incandescents, we aren’t going to be switching any time soon.

I’d be interested in learning more about this “frequency modulation” of different types of light, because it seems like vision problems relating to light bulbs affect so few people that it’s hard to find any substantive information.

[Michael63129]

@av8rmike

I’d be interested in learning more about this “frequency modulation” of different types of light, because it seems like vision problems relating to light bulbs affect so few people that it’s hard to find any substantive information.

Fluorescent lights with a magnetic ballast will flicker at twice the power line frequency since AC goes though zero volts twice per cycle. However, with modern electronic ballasts, there shouldn’t be any flickering unless it was poorly designed (insufficient input filtering); the only time I ever noticed a CFL flickering was shortly before it completely failed (one of the filter capacitors dried out, eventually shorting). Electronic ballasts do drive the lamp with high frequency AC (10s of kHz), but the light output is essentially continuous since the gas will remain ionized continuously (interesting fact - a fluorescent lamp will be more efficient when driven at high frequency for this reason).

[constanze]

@av8rmike

And I’ve suggested a couple of options as far as different-color-temperature CFLs or LED bulbs but been met with “I don’t like those things/I can’t see properly with them/Why are you still talking about this?” She’s all for reducing energy usage and being environmental, but not at the expense of being able to function. Until it does become truly impossible to obtain incandescents, we aren’t going to be switching any time soon.

I’d be interested in learning more about this “frequency modulation” of different types of light, because it seems like vision problems relating to light bulbs affect so few people that it’s hard to find any substantive information.

Um, I didn’t intend to accuse your friend of anything, but precisly because I’ve never heard of this in the past decades - as you say, very few people seem affected by this - that I’m curious to know more.
(The only issues I’ve heard that scientists have measured are those old flickering neon tubes from the 50s and 60s causing headaches or eye-strain from the visible flickering, but they have long been replaced everywhere).

[Aji_de_Gallina]

@Doug_K

Where do you get this? I tried them as long as I did because I was emphatically in favor of them. The first time several of them went out I counted it as a fluke and replaced them all. And the second time, and the third time. It was only after a year that I was dragged kicking and screaming to the realization that they just don’t perform as advertised and went back to incandescents.

Completely agreed. All my house is CFL except for two bathroom features that have an incandescent and a CFL.
CFLs last twice or maybe three times and don’t end up justifying my cost (5 to 10 times) and they break far too often. You had to be a klutz to break an incandescent but old CFLs break too easily if they are a bit stuck.

CFLs are a great idea and their light is getting better, still harsh, but better. In a warm place like mine their heat aspect isn’t particularly important.

BTW, there is no ban here.

[constanze]

@Aji_de_Gallina

CFLs last twice or maybe three times and don’t end up justifying my cost (5 to 10 times) and they break far too often. You had to be a klutz to break an incandescent but old CFLs break too easily if they are a bit stuck.

Huh? I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you mean with stuck - when they are in the socket and you try to unscrew them while switching burned-out ones?

You are supposed to not touch the tube part, which can twist off, but the base part. But that goes for all light bulbs in general: don’t touch the bulb part, but the base. This is important because your skin has oils on it, and if you touch the bulb, this introduces a weakness that shortens the lifespan of the bulb. Most important with those halogen filaments for design lamps, which are extremly sensitive, but also plays a role in other bulbs.

CFLs are a great idea and their light is getting better, still harsh, but better. In a warm place like mine their heat aspect isn’t particularly important.

Um, what? If your place is already warm, isn’t it more important to lower the heat emmission by switching from incandescent to CFL, so you need less AC?

[leggy]

@constanze

Well I don’t assume that consumers are idiots unable to read.

Who said anything about them being idiots? Just you, apparently.

The reality is, I know what my living room looks like when I have 3 60W bulbs in the ceiling fan, and 150W bulbs in my other lamps. But I have no idea how many lumens are being produced, and I’d be willing to bet 90% of consumers don’t, either.

@constanze

And just like last time you made that statement, I would like a cite for that. You can keep stating things like that, but that doesn’t make them true.

Well I’ve seen it for myself. But if, in typical internet fashion, you require a cite, here ya go:

Revealed: The design flaw in energy saving lightbulbs means they become...

@constanze

If you are indeed as you claim a photographer, yet you are so sensitive to those “peaks and valleys” in the output of CFLs, I wonder how you can do your job outside your studio at all. Or maybe you don’t leave your studio. Because I’ve never heard from normal people anything about light from CFLs being “weird” or unsettling.

Hrm. Well, you see, outside the studio is a rather amazing light source that has excellent spectral properties. Perhaps you’ve heard of it. They call it, “The sun.”

I also use another light source that has excellent spectral properties; the xenon electronic flash.

Tube florescent lights (as in office buildings) are generally much better than CFL’s.

In my experience, only sodium vapor lights are worse than CFL’s.

@constanze

The one constant comment is that the light is more blueish compared to the yellowish old bulbs. For those people who are bothered by it, the new and newest generation of CFL offer warmer colours and even full-spectrum colour. These special colours do cost more, because they require more effort when producing and are less in demand.

I’ll be interested to see how those look. Yellowish florescents tend to look really dingy.

[constanze]

If your CFL bulbs don’t last longer, maybe you need to switch brands.

From the German wiki article on CFL lifespan:

Die angegebene Lebensdauer einer Kompaktleuchtstofflampe liegt mit 3000 bis 15.000 Stunden deutlich über der einer normalen Glühlampe, welche nur 1000 bis 2000 Stunden Brenndauer aufweist. Letzteres ist allerdings nicht auf das grundsätzliche Konstruktionsprinzip der Glühlampe zurückzuführen, sondern auf gezielte Standardisierung durch die Hersteller im Sinne der Obsoleszenz (siehe: Phöbuskartell).[4] Gemäß obiger Angaben halten Kompaktleuchtstofflampen bei durchschnittlicher Nutzung von vier Stunden am Tag zwischen zwei und mehr als zehn Jahren. [5]

The stated life span of a CFL with 3 000 up to 15 000 hrs is significantly above that of a normal light bulb which has only 1 000 to 2 000 hrs of lifespan. This is however not due to a difference in construction principle, but to a specific standardization by the manufacturers in the meaning of obsolence (see: phoebus cartel). According to the above sources CFL last with an average use of four hours a day between two and more than ten years

Im Jahr 2006 testete die Stiftung Warentest 27 Kompaktleuchtstofflampen im Hinblick auf ihre Lebensdauer. Zwei der Modelle hielten nur etwa 4500 Stunden durch, 23 Lampen über 10.000 Stunden. Bei sieben der Lampen musste der Test nach 19.000 Stunden (= über zwei Jahre) aus Zeitgründen abgebrochen werden.[6] Hier lag die Lebensdauer also oberhalb der angegebenen Werte.

In einem Bericht des Verbrauchermagazins „Konsument“ wurden ebenfalls im Jahr 2006 Kompaktleuchtstofflampen getestet[7]:

Im Testzyklus 165 Minuten „ein“ und 165 Minuten „aus“ erreichten die billigsten Lampen fast 5000 Stunden Leuchtdauer, 40 % leuchteten nach 10.000 Stunden immer noch.
Im Testzyklus 0,5 Minuten „ein“ und 4,5 Minuten „aus“ erreichten billige Lampen teilweise nur 3500 Schaltzyklen und somit weniger als 30 Stunden Leuchtdauer.

Sowohl Stiftung Warentest[8] wie auch Konsument[9] haben jeweils Anfang 2008 einen weiteren Test durchgeführt, der die alten Ergebnisse bestätigt.

*In the year 2006 Stiftung Warentest (a consumer advocate group) tested 27 CFLs regarding their lifespan. Two models only lasted 4500 hrs., 23 bulbs over 10 000 hrs. With 7 bulbs, the test had to be stopped after 19 000 hrs (= more than 2 years) because of time limits. So in that case, the lifespan was above the quoted times.

In a report of the consumer magazine Konsument, also in the year 2006, CFLs were tested:

In the test cycle 165 min. on, 165 min. off, the cheapest bulbs still lasted almost 5 000 hrs, 40% still gave light after 10 000 hrs.

In the test cycle 0.5 min on and 4.5 min. off, some of the cheapest bulbs only lasted 3500 cycles and therefore less than 30 hrs of light use.

Both Stiftung Warentest and Konsument did another test in early 2008, which confirmed the old findings.*

So unless you keep switching the CFLs off after 1 min - which every source says is not how you should use them - then all evidence in Europe says they should last significantly longer.

(Planned obsolence for normal bulbs and the phoenix cartel are good reasons why legislating this is necessary.)

[leggy]

@constanze

Um, what? If your place is already warm, isn’t it more important to lower the heat emmission by switching from incandescent to CFL, so you need less AC?

Where I live, I run the AC about three months out of the year, maybe four.

Those months are during a time of year we call “summer,” when a zero-emission, zero-cost light source called “the sun” runs until about 9:00 in the evening. I typically run my lights about two hours a day during this season.

My house requires heat about five months out of the year. These months include a season called “winter,” when the sun goes down as soon as 5:00. My lights are on about seven hours a day during this season, where there is absolutely no energy penalty from the heat generated by the bulbs.

[Aji_de_Gallina]

@constanze

Huh? I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you mean with stuck - when they are in the socket and you try to unscrew them while switching burned-out ones?

You are supposed to not touch the tube part, which can twist off, but the base part. But that goes for all light bulbs in general: don’t touch the bulb part, but the base. This is important because your skin has oils on it, and if you touch the bulb, this introduces a weakness that shortens the lifespan of the bulb. Most important with those halogen filaments for design lamps, which are extremly sensitive, but also plays a role in other bulbs.

Some fixtures make it impossible to unscrew the bulb from the base and if they are so sensitive that my finger oils can shorten their lifespan, then somebody designed a bad product for home use.
Most incandescent bulbs cannot be unscrewed from the metal base.

Um, what? If your place is already warm, isn’t it more important to lower the heat emmission by switching from incandescent to CFL, so you need less AC?

I don’t have AC (almost nobody does here) and no heater.

Originally Posted by **constanze **
If your CFL bulbs don’t last longer, maybe you need to switch brands.

Testing lights that last over a year to see which one is better is a complicated enterprise. MY test is done with my two double features one CFL one incans. Several brands and always two or three times the span. If a better techonology is more expensive, more fragile, then they need to improve a lot.

[Michael63129]

I haven’t had any of the longevity issues with CFLs that others report, with the exception of one bulb that was probably defective (one of the filter capacitors dried out after a few months, which caused it to start flickering at 60 Hz, then it popped when it shorted; there have been issued with defective electrolytic capacitors in electronics). That is the only one I have had to replace so far out of about 10 regularly used lights, one of which has probably been on for 10,000 hours or more (8 hours a day for at least several years, only about 2 on/off cycles a day though).

Also, oil from fingers won’t have any effect on CFLs because they don’t get that hot; the issue is that the oil cooks on the glass, absorbing heat and creating a hotspot (the oil does not corrode the glass or anything like that). I don’t think this is really a problem with halogen replacements that are made to look like normal light bulbs either (notice the double envelope, the actual bulb is the small thing inside the big bulb, I have never had a normal incandescent fail from touching while installing).

[Anthony_Kaye]

The only bulb types really affected by human skin secretions are quartz-halogens. I don’t know about anywhere else, but here they come in a paper or plastic sleeve to protect them during installation.

[mh21112]

I installed CFL in my parent house in 1996. They cost $20 back then with a $10 rebate from the state. Most of the bulbs are still working and have not dimmed or changed color. CFL that I buy now last 1 year tops. Needless to say CFL were not made in China back then.

[constanze]

@leggy

Where I live, I run the AC about three months out of the year, maybe four.

Those months are during a time of year we call “summer,” when a zero-emission, zero-cost light source called “the sun” runs until about 9:00 in the evening. I typically run my lights about two hours a day during this season.

My house requires heat about five months out of the year. These months include a season called “winter,” when the sun goes down as soon as 5:00. My lights are on about seven hours a day during this season, where there is absolutely no energy penalty from the heat generated by the bulbs.

I was replying to Aji de Gallina who according to her profile lives in Peru. I guess they have more summer than winter there.