LightInTheWallet
Newly Enlightened
Ill
Last edited:
Will the new ban on incan bulbs include flashlights?
- Thread starter Blue72
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
woodrow
Flashlight Enthusiast
ATTENTION ALL, remember to stock up on appliance bulbs, politicos do not consider the end user ever.:thumbsdow
They make floruecent appliance bulbs. I just bought one. What I am worried about is when we have to give up real toilet paper for virtual toilet paper.
TorchBoy
Flashlight Enthusiast
Use three clam shells instead.
LightInTheWallet
Newly Enlightened
My Favorite film ever, LOL:wave:
Noxonomus
Newly Enlightened
My understanding was that the changes would come in several phases and that all they demand are percentage efficiency increases. So that within a few years all bulbs will need to put out as much light on 75W bulbs as you get form a typical hundred watt bulb, and then a few more years and it would become 50W. As far as I know there are no mentions of specific technologies so if you can meet the requirement with a halogen then you can still use halogen, they aren't really banning incandescent lighting just inefficient lighting.
I don't know what it applies to though, I wouldn't be surprised if it was just fixed light fixtures.
I don't know what it applies to though, I wouldn't be surprised if it was just fixed light fixtures.
RoyJ
Enlightened
While not an incan guy, I am sure someone will pass a exemption for portable lighting. Forget about flashlights, think about the bigger issue...CARS...
Trying to go green, I did convert my headlights to florescents. They do not light nearly as much of the road..... but it was soo worth it. Now I can leave my lights on for hours without the battery going dead!
Hey, if that means HIDs must be an OEM standard equipment, I'm all for it!
hopkins
Enlightened
In the last few months General Electric has had their lobbyists
'host' fact finding missions for Congressmen and Senators
in a certain state with one big city with 'an absurd amount of lights'
on the casino's.
Makes sense to me...
'host' fact finding missions for Congressmen and Senators
in a certain state with one big city with 'an absurd amount of lights'
on the casino's.
Makes sense to me...
2xTrinity
Flashlight Enthusiast
If that's the extent of the law, I really don't understand all the paranoia. "100W equivalence" from a 75W bulb would mean 1700 lumens from 75W, or 22.5lm/W. That can already be accomplished w/ existing 120V halogens. IRC (infrared reflective coated) halogens should be able to do even better -- in fact, I don't understand why those aren't already being sold for applications like dimmable track light lamps (dimmability/focusability can't be done with retrofit CFLs). As of right now there is really no viable energy-efficient alternatives for small halogen spotlights.
The last time I went to Lowes, the incandescents on the shelf were actually getting less efficient -- the only incandescents sold at a reasonable price (<$1.00 each) were "Reveal" lamps with blue-filtered glass, producing a whopping 12 lm/W! Slightly more efficient halogen incans were being sold for absurd prices like $7/each.
Switching all the tiny auxiliary bulbs throughout the car (amber lights, tail lights, small white lights to illuminate license plate, auxiliary forward lights) for appropriately colored and focused LEDs would actually save more power than changing the headights. Those changes are good as well, as the overtaxed vehicle electrical systems need all the help they can get. Also, electricity is more expensive in a car than it is at home:
Cost of grid power: $0.15/kWh
Cost of gas: $3.30/gallon
Chemical energy in 1 gallon of gas = 130MJ = 36.1 kWh
Cost of electricity in a car (assuming 25% ICE efficiency, and 66% alternator efficiency):
$3.30/(0.66*0.25*36.1) = $0.55/kWh
I do believe the government needs to set a mandatory minimum PWM frequency of >1kHz for vehicle LED lights -- several car taillights on the road produce noticeable PWM flicker (est. about 100Hz) which is EXTREMELY annoying to other drivers.
Last edited:
TorchBoy
Flashlight Enthusiast
I haven't ever seen that here, but I can imagine that would be really annoying.
jzmtl
Flashlight Enthusiast
My fridge and range hood use incan bulbs size of a fluorescent ballast, it's never gona fit.
Outdoors Fanatic
Flashlight Enthusiast
Only a Gov't that blows...
Outdoors Fanatic
Flashlight Enthusiast
Forget about flesh-on-flesh contacts too.
powernoodle
Flashlight Enthusiast
You know, I looked and looked at Article 1, Section VIII of the Constitution, which grants to Congress certain limited authority.
Didn't see anything giving them the authority to tell me what kind of lighting device I could use. :shrug:
Guess that is for another thread. On another board.
ATTENTION ALL, remember to stock up on appliance bulbs, politicos do not consider the end user ever.
As I posted with pictures of some of my unique home bulbs in this thread, I have yet to find an LED that I liked over the color and other features of an incan. Some of the fluorescent bulbs at least have "natural" spectrum coatings that make them more appealing.
Like the small toilet restriction, government restrictions bowing to lobby pressures have no regard for the impact on many individuals. I guarantee I have a slew of custom and antique lighting/lamps that no fluorescent light will fit.
The answer is to stock up now.
A CFL bulb has under 5 milligrams of mercury.All the extra mercury in landfills is going to do womders for the environment
Please don't pollute the discussion with myth, or try to subvert sensible environmentalism with hyperbole and FUD. Thanks.
I agree with you in many respects... especially since I am firmly against the "ban it" policies of current lawmakers.
In my view, the best way to phase out incandescent lighting where possible, is to make it economically less attractive than compact fluorescent.
For instance... one can purchase 2 poor-quality 60W incandescent bulbs for $1. A pair of CFLs will cost about $3. To push the adoption of CFLs along, and instead of the ridiculous ban on incandescents, they could instead institute a tax on lighting sources that do not meet certain efficiency ratings, that would bring their prices above that of the more efficient lights. In a perfect world, the money obtained from levying this tax would then be used for environmental conservation.
This way, if you simply must have incandescents, you can still get them... just at a somewhat elevated price...
2xTrinity
Flashlight Enthusiast
I simply want to see the incandescents that are more efficient become available at a reasonable price. I understand that there are many applications where incandescent lamps remain the only viable choice, such as dimmable halogen spotlights. Multi-phosphor LEDs could potentially fulfill that applicaion, but I'm skeptical we'll see any able to plug-and-play into existing fixtures without severe compromises any time soon.
I would love to see some IRC halogens on the shelves for these applications (infrared reflective coating, reflects wasted IR rays to re-heat the filament). Those are ~60% more efficient and should have NO drawbacks in terms of quality of light, and compatibility with dimmers.
