EU ban of halogen lamps - tomorrow - first I've heard of it!

[james_s]

Yeah it is not efficient by any means but back then was the means to achieve less power and more lifespan from that bulbs. The halogen bulbs doesn't trip too much as expected with home made triac dimming but is not so crisp as the incandescent filament indeed
.

If you dim halogen bulbs too far down you get *less* lifespan because the bulb doesn't achieve sufficient temperature for the halogen cycle to work. It was a common problem with those halogen torchier lamps that used to be very popular, and also laser printer fuser rollers. I would often see tubular halogen lamps that had turned almost completely black/silver from being used in this sort of application. Normally they stay almost transparent until end of life.

[Cyberdragon]

If LED bulbs where so much better, there'd be no need to ban incandescents.

The ban just pushes prices down to affordable levels. The Philips LED lamps I bought where around 6 euro each. That is more than an incandescent lamp but the LED lamps ought to last longer. At least the Philips long-life CFL lamps I had before did. As I wrote before the CFL lamps where already a big improvement when it came to generating excessive heat. At the current price levels I'd buy LED lamps anyway because they have some advantages compared to CFL (slow start).

Really? That's an expensive fancy bulb they want you to get then. As I said, in the states LEDs are 50c to a few bucks each, yet the same stores still sell 100W incandescants...

I smell political crap...

[james_s]

The really, really cheap LED bulbs suck, but there are a lot of good ones in the $5-$8 range. I started buying LED bulbs back around 2010 when they were $40 a pop and even that was well worth it. Every one of those early Philips lamps I bought are still in service, the ones in my outside lights have many thousands of hours on them and even at $40 they have paid for themselves in savings some time ago.

I didn't think incandescent lamps should be banned, but rather tax them to subsidize more efficient lamps. The reason a purely free market doesn't work here is that a substantial number of people are either too ignorant or too stupid to understand the relation between lumens per Watt and the amount they pay each month for the electric bill. I remember hearing countless people moaning about how incandescent lamps were "only 50 cents" completely oblivious to the fact that the biggest expense by far is the energy required to run them. Beats me why but a lot of people really just can't seem to grasp the fact that a $10 bulb that consumes 8 Watts is cheaper than a 50 cent bulb that consumes 60 Watts once you pay for the power to run it. Nevermind the fact that even the lower cost LED bulbs last 10-15 times as long as a standard incandescent.

[stj]

what pisses me off, is who the hell are they to tell me how i spend my money,
if i want to use "ineficient" lights then it's my money paying for the power.

damned communists need to be rounded up and put in a camp somewhere - auswitz maybe, as they spent so much keeping it open.
because if not, they will eventually have us naked and living in caves again! - with a barcode tatoo'd on our head.

[malagas_on_fire]

Yeah it is not efficient by any means but back then was the means to achieve less power and more lifespan from that bulbs. The halogen bulbs doesn't trip too much as expected with home made triac dimming but is not so crisp as the incandescent filament indeed
.

If you dim halogen bulbs too far down you get *less* lifespan because the bulb doesn't achieve sufficient temperature for the halogen cycle to work. It was a common problem with those halogen torchier lamps that used to be very popular, and also laser printer fuser rollers. I would often see tubular halogen lamps that had turned almost completely black/silver from being used in this sort of application. Normally they stay almost transparent until end of life.

Well thanks for the advice. I have some 18W spare ones to test / learn stuff on triacs . From a test on a homemade circuit i can't dim as low as the incandescent lamp, since it vanishes imedialty.

[Mr. Scram]

what pisses me off, is who the hell are they to tell me how i spend my money,
if i want to use "ineficient" lights then it's my money paying for the power.

damned communists need to be rounded up and put in a camp somewhere - auswitz maybe, as they spent so much keeping it open.
because if not, they will eventually have us naked and living in caves again! - with a barcode tatoo'd on our head.

I guess you'll be wanting to buy leaded fuel and asbestos roof cladding too?

[Cyberdragon]

what pisses me off, is who the hell are they to tell me how i spend my money,
if i want to use "ineficient" lights then it's my money paying for the power.

damned communists need to be rounded up and put in a camp somewhere - auswitz maybe, as they spent so much keeping it open.
because if not, they will eventually have us naked and living in caves again! - with a barcode tatoo'd on our head.

I guess you'll be wanting to buy leaded fuel and asbestos roof cladding too?

But incandescant bulbs arn't toxic...they're harmless. (Yet LED bulbs are certainly E-waste)
http://www.electronicstakeback.com/2013/01/16/new-research-shows-cfls-and-led-lightbulbs-have-higher-toxicity-and-resource-depletion-than-incandescent/
https://allgreenrecycling.com/need-know-recycling-leds/amp/

Progress for the sake of progress is bad...soon everyone will be using shitty class D guitar amps just because "progress".



And the EU is also where they want to ban free analog radio..."progress"....

[james_s]

LED bulbs are not e-waste, they can be disposed of in the ordinary trash, at least in the US.

You're missing the point though, it's about the energy consumption. Incandescent lamps waste a huge amount of energy compared to more efficient sources. That affects all of us in the form of increased pollution, increased consumption of limited resources, increased need to expand the grid which costs everyone. Your attitude is a perfect example of *why* incandescent bulbs were banned, it's because of stubborn people who seem to hold an almost religious belief that anything "green" is some kind of crazy liberal conspiracy.

Now like I said, I don't like to see anything banned myself, there are a few applications where incandescent still has advantages, and for that reason they should still be available, albeit at a considerably higher price since the initial purchase price is the only thing that sways most people's purchasing decisions.

[stj]

the west has had it's manufacturing industries gutted,
there is no need to BS about power usage when the networks where built for much higher capacity than they will ever see again.

power stations are idled or even pulled down because useage has dropped so much.
as for resources, there is no shortage of oil or gas and probably never will be.
although the industry will lie about that forever to keep the prices high.

[Cyberdragon]

Maybe they should focus their efforts on clean energy rather then trying to force control on people's daily lives. Light bulbs aren't the biggest concern of energy waste. This isn't about "green conspiricy", it's about consumer forcing. Just like here in the states where we had that stupid healthcare mandate.

Putting restrictions on municipalities energy usage might not be a bad idea, but consumer control is ludicrous. What next, are they gonna restrict the amount of energy you're allowed to use? Do the whole smartmeter lights out if you exceed your quota? Ban experiments with electricity (or make it impracticle)?

Also, just because it can be thrown in the trash doesn't mean it should be (like batteries). But then again, we aren't forced to use them (LED bulbs), so the quantities we are (or will be) disposing of are minimal.

[ebastler]

what pisses me off, is who the hell are they to tell me how i spend my money,
if i want to use "ineficient" lights then it's my money paying for the power.

damned communists need to be rounded up and put in a camp somewhere - auswitz maybe, as they spent so much keeping it open.
because if not, they will eventually have us naked and living in caves again! - with a barcode tatoo'd on our head.

there is no need to BS about power usage when the networks where built for much higher capacity than they will ever see again.

there is no shortage of oil or gas and probably never will be.
although the industry will lie about that forever to keep the prices high.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Trolling

[malagas_on_fire]

Yeah it is not efficient by any means but back then was the means to achieve less power and more lifespan from that bulbs. The halogen bulbs doesn't trip too much as expected with home made triac dimming but is not so crisp as the incandescent filament indeed
.

If you dim halogen bulbs too far down you get *less* lifespan because the bulb doesn't achieve sufficient temperature for the halogen cycle to work. It was a common problem with those halogen torchier lamps that used to be very popular, and also laser printer fuser rollers. I would often see tubular halogen lamps that had turned almost completely black/silver from being used in this sort of application. Normally they stay almost transparent until end of life.

Well thanks for the advice. I have some 18W spare ones to test / learn stuff on triacs . From a test on a homemade circuit i can't dim as low as the incandescent lamp, since it vanishes imedialty.

The Warm glow dimmable also works good with triacs, but be carefull with snubber network,

[tszaboo]

what pisses me off, is who the hell are they to tell me how i spend my money,
if i want to use "ineficient" lights then it's my money paying for the power.

Because you and I and everyone else lives from the same resource pool, and it is quite good that the politicians do this, forcing you to change. And forcing landlords, commercial projects and everywhere else to do this. In many places the person buying the light and paying for electricity is a different person. First thing that I did after moving in my new apartment was replacing all the lights installed. I placed it in a nice box, put it in the garage, now there is LEDs everywhere. I have IKEA smart LED panels in the living room, from 2x34W I can turn the living room into the same as summer light, or dim it as much as I want, change color temperature, and so on. Without glare.

The really, really cheap LED bulbs suck, but there are a lot of good ones in the $5-$8 range. I started buying LED bulbs back around 2010 when they were $40 a pop and even that was well worth it. Every one of those early Philips lamps I bought are still in service, the ones in my outside lights have many thousands of hours on them and even at $40 they have paid for themselves in savings some time ago.

Now for 7 EUR you get 400 lumen smart lights, or 2 pieces of 1000 lumen quality LEDs. But in reality, lamps with built in LED, without the bulb, are really the way to go. With 4 hours a day, you get 20 years of lifetime. Heat dissipation is easier to solve, and the light they give is nicer.

People also forget that LED is still just getting better and better. Next technology to hit mainstream is the nano particles, the same what is used on Samsung and LG TVs. They solved the heating problem, so goodbye phosphor, and welcome CRI better than 95.

[Mr. Scram]

Progress for the sake of progress is bad...soon everyone will be using shitty class D guitar amps just because "progress".



And the EU is also where they want to ban free analog radio..."progress"....

Except that it is progress. The difference in power consumption is quite remarkable. If you have proper waste processing that isn't an issue either.

It really does seem to be a case of people who love to hate change, whatever that change is. Or not wanting to be told what to do, even for their own sake. They're basic and primal emotions, but those don't always serve us well.

[Cyberdragon]

You don't see us go rounding up amish and whatnot now do you?

This isn't about eventual phase out. We get it, most lighting will be LED (or other forms of high efficiency light, solid state or otherwise) in the future. But with digital TV, at least they gave us converter boxes so we can keep our old TVs. Let us keep our bloody old lightbulbs! You don't see people banning vacuum tubes for audio stuff!

REDUCE. reuse. recycle. The "reduce" is all environmental impact. Making people throw away all their lightbulbs isn't reducing waste now is it.

[Mr. Scram]

You don't see us go rounding up amish and whatnot now do you?

This isn't about eventual phase out. We get it, most lighting will be LED (or other forms of high efficiency light, solid state or otherwise) in the future. But with digital TV, at least they gave us converter boxes so we can keep our old TVs. Let us keep our bloody old lightbulbs! You don't see people banning vacuum tubes for audio stuff!

REDUCE. reuse. recycle. The "reduce" is all environmental impact. Making people throw away all their lightbulbs isn't reducing waste now is it.

You know you get to keep your lights, right? It's just that incandescent replacements have been made harder but not impossible to purchase. If an incandescent bulb dies it gets replaced by a LED bulb. The sale of new incandescent bulbs has been limited, but the use hasn't.

Throwing away lightbulbs would be silly. That's what the use of propagandist terms gets you. People get very strange ideas about what's going on.

[NiHaoMike]

But with digital TV, at least they gave us converter boxes so we can keep our old TVs.

Cheap but overpriced converter boxes that are barely good enough to use as toys. They should have just made it usable on anything capable of receiving digital TV. Costs the government the same but the consumers would have the option of actually getting something decent if they decide to pay more.

[Cyberdragon]

But with digital TV, at least they gave us converter boxes so we can keep our old TVs.

Cheap but overpriced converter boxes that are barely good enough to use as toys. They should have just made it usable on anything capable of receiving digital TV. Costs the government the same but the consumers would have the option of actually getting something decent if they decide to pay more.

Yeah, they're cheap chinese crap, but at least it's something. They dare not touch analog radio though.

[Mr. Scram]

Yeah, they're cheap chinese crap, but at least it's something. They dare not touch analog radio though.

Analog radio is on its way out too. The demand for more radio channels and an ever more crowded ether means a push towards digital radio. That's not something governments pull out of their hindparts. Few of these things are. Almost all legislation is reactive.

[james_s]

the west has had it's manufacturing industries gutted,
there is no need to BS about power usage when the networks where built for much higher capacity than they will ever see again.

power stations are idled or even pulled down because useage has dropped so much.
as for resources, there is no shortage of oil or gas and probably never will be.
although the industry will lie about that forever to keep the prices high.

Cite your source please?

Because that most certainly isn't the case in the USA. Despite reduced manufacturing, our overall electrical consumption is higher than ever and steadily increasing, the question of what to do to improve our electrical grid to meet future demand is a serious issue. Our (private, for-profit) utility has for years been providing subsidies to encourage people to upgrade their lighting, heating, windows and insulation to reduce demand in an attempt to stave off expensive upgrades to the grid construction of new power plants.


Frankly you sound like one of those conspiracy nuts with an argument backed by nothing but emotion and what you wish to be reality rather than the reality the rest of us live in.

[Cyberdragon]

Yeah, they're cheap chinese crap, but at least it's something. They dare not touch analog radio though.

Analog radio is on its way out too. The demand for more radio channels and an ever more crowded ether means a push towards digital radio. That's not something governments pull out of their hindparts. Few of these things are. Almost all legislation is reactive.

Not here, digital radio is just a fad thing over here (for broadcast anyway, it's just called HD radio). In fact, most of the digital signal here is just the music data or simulcast, not sure how many all digital stations we even have.

The FCC has not indicated any intent to force off analog radio broadcasts as it has with analog television broadcasts,[1] as it would not result in the recovery of any radio spectrum rights which could be sold. Thus, there is no deadline by which consumers must buy an HD Radio receiver. In addition, there are many more analog AM/FM radio receivers than there were analog televisions, and many of these are car stereos or portable units that cannot be upgraded.

 

You all over there can have your super complicated cheap (but overpriced) chinese crap just to hear a news broadcast while we can sit back with a pencil and some wire around a can and get whetever we want.

P.S. Since when don't governments make horrible decisions by pulling crap out their ass? The healthcare bill is nasty but minor. This country thought it was a brilliant idea to amend our constitution just to ban alcohol to try and and stop crime. Well look what happened...

[james_s]

The reason digital radio largely failed here is that for some reason we adopted a closed proprietary system that requires expensive licensed chipsets to decode. Personally I'm glad it has failed, analog radio works just fine and there are many millions of analog radios out there. The head unit in my car can receive "HD" radio and while it sounds marginally better than FM under ideal circumstances, any time it's less than ideal the signal drops out intermittently which is far more annoying than a little static.

[ebastler]

This isn't about eventual phase out. We get it, most lighting will be LED (or other forms of high efficiency light, solid state or otherwise) in the future. But with digital TV, at least they gave us converter boxes so we can keep our old TVs. Let us keep our bloody old lightbulbs!
[...]
Making people throw away all their lightbulbs isn't reducing waste now is it.

Are you joking?? Of course you get to keep your bloody lightbulbs, and can happily continue using them until they die.

And -- surprise, surprise -- they won't even start sending a different type of current down the line to power those newfangled LED bulbs. Your lighbulbs will stay fully compatible; you don't even need a converter box! Amazing, isn't it? 

[Simon]

what pisses me off, is who the hell are they to tell me how i spend my money,
if i want to use "ineficient" lights then it's my money paying for the power.

damned communists need to be rounded up and put in a camp somewhere - auswitz maybe, as they spent so much keeping it open.
because if not, they will eventually have us naked and living in caves again! - with a barcode tatoo'd on our head.

You obviously miss the basic points about living in a society. Freedom is one thing, but we all have the same freedoms which means that unlimited freedom is not practical and as you make clear self destructive. Why does YOUR "freedom" to run inefficient lights trump my freedom to breath clean air and live on a planet that has not bee wrecked by global warming? Power usage has continued to rise with an increasing population, but it's usage has not risen nearly as much as it would have had we not adopted more efficient technologies. Don't like it? go find yourself another planet!

[dzseki]

Power usage has continued to rise with an increasing population, but it's usage has not risen nearly as much as it would have had we not adopted more efficient technologies.

While this is true, this population growth is happening outside of the EU, and unfortunately as it seems where the most pollution is generated there are the least regulations in action...