Responding to a recent brain-dead column in the Boston Globe spewing right wing talking points about incandescent bulbs, Zia Eftekhar, CEO of Phillips Lighting North America, a member of the Lighting Hall of Fame (who knew?) – set the record straight, once again:
JEFF JACOBY’S assertion in his July 17 op-ed, “How many lawmakers does it take to..,’’ implies that the 2007 federal energy efficiency law will ban incandescent light bulbs. This is actually not the case, and is a common misunderstanding of the legislation. With this law consumers now have more choice than ever before, including new energy-efficient incandescent light bulbs that meet the new requirements.
Already on retail shelves and selling for as little as $1.49, energy-efficient incandescents look and feel the same as the light bulbs consumers have been using for more than 100 years, but they use almost 30 percent less energy. They are no more fragile than their traditional incandescent sibling, and some can last as much as 3,000 hours, or three times longer than Edison’s bulb.
Even compact fluorescent bulbs have been greatly improved over the years in both performance and light quality, including new silicone-covered versions that are shatter resistant and self-contained should the bulb break.
Our company’s innovation in energy-efficient bulbs is in direct response to consumer demand for longer-lasting, more energy-efficient products. We consistently work to improve their development and help lower their cost, while trying to be mindful of how their operation and recycling will impact the environment.
The savings from these new choices are a direct result of government, business, and industry working together to drive innovation and improve energy efficiency. At a time when families are struggling with high energy costs, these new minimum efficiency levels will lower our nation’s electricity bills by over $12 billion per year. That’s about $100 per year for every American family.
After all that fire and brimstone over the impending phase-out of incandescent light bulbs, lighting giant Philips has stepped in to pour oil on troubled waters. The company has just launched a new energy efficient light bulb that looks and acts just like an incandescent light bulb. At a 28 percent energy savings, the company’s new EcoVantage light bulb is designed to satisfy 21st century federal energy efficiency standards while preserving the classic 19th century styling
Now that the dust has settled, it looks like certain light bulb loving politicians are due for their Emily Litella moment, as in, “Never mind.”
So much noise, I’m surprised these characters having looked into creating the next step up from an Amish lifestyle – one that reflects a wholesome world before computers, hygiene and vaccination… a time when the incandescent light globe shone a dim yellow glow, but emitted a new sense of opulence…
I can’t believe people are getting paid to argue over severely outdated technology like this – haven’t we got bigger issues to discuss?
Moth,
Old “obsolescent” incandescent technology is also safe
exactly from being old and well known simple technology, compared to
new complex lighting technology, certainly with advantages too, but
not necessarily proven as always safe.
CFLs – mercury, radiation, fire issues
LEDs – lead and arsenic issues (http://ceolas.net/#li18eax onwards)
Welcoming the new does not mean having to ban the old.
Radio tubes weren’t banned just because transistors came along,
but were sold less anyway (as is now happening with incandescents, thanks to all the energy saving light subsidies) ,
and the tubes are still appreciated for a some special uses – any guitarists out there 😉
True, and how wonderfully easy would the decision be if we wished to look at it so simplistically!
Luckily, if you use the new technology as an adult (ie. you don’t smash them) you’ll find that all that material is kept safely away (although I would like to see better retrieval of old globes, but I’ve got a problem with waste disposal in general). On the other hand, if we all got nostalgic and embraced this technology (hell, why not the old steam train as well), it can be at best an educated guess just how many more coal fired power plants we would need to run this inefficient warm-and-fuzziness…
You know what, I’ve been using energy saving globes for more than a decade (I even had one that faulty and the globe section fell out of the base) and LED’s in a technical capacity for much longer. Call it a miracle, but I’ve not once been poisoned.
On the other hand, I grew up in the SE of Australia, in the heartland of the coal power production. I have vivid memories of my sister being taking to the hospital at all hours of the night and day due to asthma attacked – which she no longer had to endure when we moved away. In subsequent years, I’ve actually worked with the SA EPA in Air Quality and for my own education also read up on the reports produced by the Vic EPA. I don’t think I need to tell you about the particulates, greenhouse gases and other nasties that spew out from a coal fired power plant.
You can avoid the chemicals stuck behind glass, but not those in the air around you, unfortunately…
From what I’ve been gathering from Peter’s reporting here, it’s not a “ban” either – but that has been the selling pitch of those wishing to stop it from occuring.
No more incandescents? But how will I heat my house? LOL
I’ll have to use that! lol
An astoundingly awesome and alluring alliterative announcement! [and I thought I was good at it]
Lightbulb lunacy? It just made me think that it’s not that long ago we were sat in trees, throwing monkey poo at each other….
Strange how you wheel out a
global-trade profit-seeking major manufacturer corporate executive Friend for the Cause 😉
About the industrial politics behind the ban, with documentation and copies of official communications http://www.ceolas.net/#li01inx
Or put it another way,
Why would anyone seek and welcome restrictions on what they are allowed to make?
As an environmental campaigner, I agree that there are good ways to
save energy and emissions, though light bulb regulations is not one of them.
While the hysteria of “having to use them darn mercury-ridden squigglies”
is clearly wrong, it is nevertheless a ban…
An early ban on simple incandescents and an eventual ban on ALL known incandescents.
Official links +updates: http://ceolas.net/#li01inx
Therefore the hailed Halogen type replacements etc are all banned too before 2020 on the Energy Act 45 lumen per Watt specification.
Besides,
the replacement incandescents have a different light quality as well as much greater expense for marginal savings, which is why neither Politicans or Consumers like them….
and, overall, the savings don’t hold either for society (less than 1% US energy usage, 1-2% grid electricity) or for consumers, using DOE and other official
statistics – http://ceolas.net/#li171x
How many Congressmen should it take to change a light bulb?
None.
How many Citizens should be allowed to choose?
Everyone…